Gauhati High Court
Pradip Buragohain vs The State Of Assam on 18 February, 2022
Page No.# 1/6
GAHC010027512022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./336/2022
PRADIP BURAGOHAIN
S/O LATE ARABINDA BURAGOHAIN
R/O HOUSE NO. 41, BYE LANE NO. 2
WIRELESS, BELTOLA, GUWAHATI-781028
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A K BHUYAN
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BORTHAKUR
ORDER
18.02.2022
Heard Mr. A.K. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the accused petitioner as well as
Mr. M. Phukan, learned Public Prosecutor, Gauhati High Court appearing for the
State respondent.
Page No.# 2/6
2. By this petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the accused-petitioner, namely
Pradip Buragohain has prayed for grant of bail in connection with Fatasil
Ambari P.S. Case No. 817/2021 u/s 120B/406/409/420/469/34 of the
IPC.
3. An F.I.R. was lodged with the Officer-in-Charge of Fatasil Ambari Police
Station on 06.12.2021 by one Pritam Mahanta, Chief Executive Officer (I/C),
Assam Cricket Association (For short 'A.C.A.'), Guwahati alleging that while the
accused petitioner was holding the post of Hony. Secretary of the said A.C.A.
from 12.06.2016 to 12.01.2019, he committed financial
irregularities/misappropriation of the developmental funds provided to it under
different heads, as detected by the Verification Committee, running to several
crores.
4. Mr. A.K. Bhuyan, learned counsel appearing for the accused petitioner,
contends that the accused has been in judicial custody for 62 days despite being
absolutely innocent as whatever amount of fund he spent during his tenure was
spent as per the collective decision of the A.C.A. adhering to the procedural
provisions of the Constitution of the A.C.A. Mr. Bhuyan, referring to the relevant
documents annexed to the bail application, vehemently contends justifying the
expenditures within the powers and authority specifically provided in the
aforesaid Constitution of the Association and further, that the findings of the
Verification Committee were one sided partial findings inasmuch as the
expenditures he incurred were duly audited where in its report did not find any
illegality. Terming the accused a philanthropic by nature, Mr. A.K. Bhuyan,
learned counsel, contends that accused, who was an elected Member of the
A.C.A. and various sports Associations, contributed a lot for all round welfare of
talented individuals in the field of sports by awarding scholarships etc. on his
Page No.# 3/6
own. It is contended that the accused being not a public servant and A.C.A.
being registered under the Societies Registration Act, Section 409 of the IPC is
not attracted to the instant case. Mr. Bhuyan also contends that the accused had
undergone police custody for 2(two) days and his detail statement under
Section 161 Cr.P.C. has already been recorded and as such, subject to any
condition(s), this Court may deem appropriate to impose, the accused may be
granted the liberty of bail.
5. Strongly opposing the bail application, Mr. M. Phukan, learned Public
Prosecutor, Gauhati High Court, inter-alia, contends that the accused was one of
the responsible office bearers of the A.C.A. and for wrongful gain, he in
connivance with others, forged and manipulated documents, the scrutiny of
which is still going on. Mr. Phukan further contends that if at the present
preliminary stage of investigation, the liberty of bail is granted to the accused,
who is a highly influential person, there is every possibility to hamper in
collection of additional evidence in the case and influence the witnesses
concerned with the allegations brought against him and further, in the arrest of
the co-accused persons.
6. Referring to Section 182 of the Indian Contract Act, Mr. Phukan contends
that as the accused represented all the illegal dealings on behalf of the A.C.A.
with third persons, he acted as agent of the principal establishing a master and
servant relationship and as such, the offence under Section 409 of the IPC is
attracted to the case. Therefore, Mr. Phukan submits that the accused's bail
application may not be considered favourably in the interest of smooth and
hindrance free investigation.
7. It is noticed that the accused petitioner has been under judicial custody for
62 days since remanded in on 17.12.2021 and passed through extensive
Page No.# 4/6
interrogations in police custody for 2 (two) days vide the order of the learned
Court.
8. An in-depth scrutiny of the case diary, inter-alia, reveals that the accused
petitioner was holding the post of elected Honorary Secretary of A.C.A. from
2016 to 2019. Ex-facie, during his tenure, the accused undertook/executed
various infrastructural development activities and while executing such various
projects, he either spent several crores of rupees of funds received from the
BCCI/Government either without approval of the A.C.A. or in excess of the
approved estimates of the A.C.A. and also unauthorisedly sold property of the
A.C.A. The accused even allegedly bore expenditures engaging his son for
different assignments and on account of purchasing materials, providing rented
house for him on his personal initiative and without due prior approval of the
A.C.A. in contravention of the provisions of the Memorandum of the said
Association. The Verification Committee detected those alleged financial
irregularities and duly reported to the A.C.A, a copy of which is annexed to the
FIR itself. However, this Court is of the opinion that these are questions of fact
which are subject to final outcome in investigation and trial in the case, if
charge-sheet is submitted after completion of investigation.
9. On the other hand, the co-accused person namely, Manindra Nath Saikia,
the then Treasurer of the ACA has already been granted the liberty of bail under
Section 439 Cr.PC., vide order, dated 04.02.2022 passed by this Court in B.A.
No. 95/2022 and the present accused's W.P.(Crl.) No. 29/2021 whereby he
prayed for his release on the alleged grounds of wrongful detention etc., stood
dismissed vide this Court's judgment and order dated 10.02.2022.
10. Being a question of facts and law whether the offence under Section 409
of the IPC is attracted to the instant case, this Court finds that it cannot be
Page No.# 5/6
decided within the parameters of Section 439 Cr.P.C.
11. For the above stated reasons, more particularly, the nature of the alleged
financial irregularities committed, the satisfactory progress of investigation so
far made in respect of the role of the accused petitioner, his state of health and
the length of detention, the bail application of the accused petitioner may be
considered favourably subject to conditions.
12. Accordingly, it is provided that the accused petitioner, namely, Pradip
Buragohain, shall be released on bail of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
Thousand) only with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M), Guwahati subject to the
following conditions: -
i) That the accused/petitioner shall cooperate with the
Investigating Officer as and when required;
ii) That the accused/petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make
any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with
the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such
facts to the Police Officer or the Court;
iii) That the accused/petitioner shall not hamper or tamper with the
investigation in any manner; and
iv) That the accused/petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of
Guwahati City without prior permission of the Court of learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (Metro) at Guwahati and prior intimation
of such order passed by the Court to the investigating officer till
completion of investigation.
Page No.# 6/6
The Investigating Officer is directed to expedite investigation of the case
which involves public interest.
Return the case diary.
This disposes of the bail application.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
