Gauhati High Court
Satya Ram Kalita vs The State Of Assam on 29 July, 2022
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010138562022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./1678/2022
SATYA RAM KALITA
SON OF LATE PRANESWAR KALITA
R/O HOUSE NO. 74,
NARENGI HOUSING COLONY,
NARENGI, GUWAHATI,
P.S. NOONMATI
DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM
PIN-781026
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REP.BY THE PP, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K N CHOUDHURY
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
ORDER
Date : 29.07.2022
Heard Mr. K.N. Choudhury, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. T.
Deuri, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant and Mr.K.K.
Page No.# 2/4
Paresar, the learned Additional P.P. appearing for the State.
This is an application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 praying for grant of regular bail by the Applicant Satya Ram
Kalita in respect to Tangla Police Station Case No. 179/2021 registered under
Sections 406/409/420/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
A perusal of the translated copy of the FIR which has been enclosed as
Annexure-A to the bail application transpires that one Pankaj Akhomia had
lodged the said FIR stating inter alia that a huge corruption to the tune of Rs.
4.18 crore had occurred in Tangla Irrigation Division located within the District
of Udalguri. It has been further mentioned that a large scandal took place under
the leadership of Mrigen Boro, the Superintendent Engineer of Irrigation
Department , Kokrajhar, Satya Ram Kalita, the Executive Engineer, Tangla
Irrigation Division and Prabhat Kalita, Accountant. It has been further alleged
that the aforesaid persons had tactfully withdrawn from the Directorate of
Treasury an amount of Rs. 4.18 crore which was the security deposit money
kept against the allotted contractual work and thereafter the said amount has
been misappropriated by depositing excess amount in the account of the
contractors rather than depositing what was actually due to the contractors by
entering into a secret agreement with some selected contractors and they had
taken 80% of the amount from the contractors for many years. Pursuant thereto
on 23/5/2022, the Applicant who was the Executive Engineer of the Tangla
Irrigation Division surrendered before the Court of the Additional CJM, Udalguri.
It further appears from the records that since then the Applicant has been in
custody.
Mr. K.K. Paresar, the Additional P.P. submits that on 25/7/2022 charge-
sheet being C.S. No. 15/2022 has already been filed before the Court of the
Page No.# 3/4
CJM, Udalguri. He submits that under such circumstances instead of this Court
entertaining the instant bail application, the Petitioner may be permitted to file
appropriate application before the Trial Court.
On the other hand, Mr. K.N. Choudhury, the learned Senior Counsel
appearing on behalf of the Petitioner drawing the attention of this Court to an
order dated passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Deepak Saran Vs.
A.C.B., CBI reported in (2019) SCC Online SC 2074 submitted that merely
because of the charge-sheet being filed, the Petitioner's bail application cannot
be rejected inasmuch as this Court has the power to even grant bail in such
circumstances. The learned Senior Counsel further submits that in view of the
filing of the charge-sheet by the State, the Applicant on that very ground ought
to be enlarged on bail taking into account that his custodial interrogation is no
longer required.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also perused
the order passed by the Supreme Court in Deepak Saran's case. Paragraph
Nos. 3, 4 and 5 of the said order being relevant is quoted herein below :
"3. This appeal takes exception to the judgment of the High Court of
Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 25769 of 2018
dated 9 October, 2018, whereby the second bail application filed by the
accused-appellant came to be rejected.
4. The accused-appellant has been charged for the offence punishable
under Section 120-B read with Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C. and
Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act,
1988 in connection with Special Case No. 5 of 2017 arising out of R.C. No.
1202016A0006 of 2016 Police Station A.C.B., C.B.I., Ghaziabad, District-
Ghaziabad.
5. The accused-appellant was arrested on 16.08.2017. It is not in dispute
that charge-sheet has already been filed on 28 March, 2017. The charge-
sheet indicates that the entire amount has since been recovered. In any
case, since the charge-sheet has been filed and no further custodial
interrogation of the accused-appellant is necessary coupled with the fact
that the trial of the case will take some time, we are inclined to direct
Page No.# 4/4
release of the accused-appellant on bail on such terms and conditions as
may be imposed by the trial Court in connection with Special Case No. 5 of
2017 arising out of R.C. No. 1202016A0006 of 2016 Police Station A.C.B.,
C.B.I.,Ghaziabad, District-Ghaziabad. We order accordingly."
A perusal of the relevant portion of the order as quoted hereinabove
would show that the Supreme Court observed that since the charge-sheet has
been filed, no further custodial interrogation of the Applicant is necessary
coupled with the fact that the trial of the case would take some time and as
such directed release of the accused/Appellant on such terms and conditions as
may be imposed by the Trial Court in connection with the case in question. In
the instant case as the charge-sheet has already been submitted and the
learned P.P. also could not assign any reason as to why any further custodial
interrogation of the Applicant is required after filing of the charge-sheet, this
Court deems it proper to enlarge the Applicant on bail in respect to Tangla P.S.
Case No. 179/2021(Charge-Sheet No. 15/2022) on such terms and conditions as
may be imposed by the learned CJM, Udalguri.
The bail application stands disposed off accordingly.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
