Gauhati High Court
Jatin Panging vs The State Of Assam on 19 April, 2023
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010208442022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
I.A.(Crl.)/645/2022
JATIN PANGING
S/O BADIRAM PANGING
R/O LIGRIBARI
DISANGMUKH
P.S.- SIVASAGAR
DIST.- SIVASAGAR
ASSAM.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REP. BY THE P.P.
ASSAM.
2:SRI DINESH PANGING
S/O- LT HOISRE PANGING
R/O- DISANGMUKH
LIGIRIBARI
P.S.SIVASAGAR
DIST. SIVASAGAR
PIN-785640
------------
Advocate for : MR P KATAKI
Advocate for : PP
ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM
Page No.# 2/3
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
ORDER
Date : --19.04.2023
1. Heard Mr. P. Kataki, learned counsel for the appellant/applicant. Also heard Mr. P.
Borthakur, learned Addl. P.P. for respondent No. 1 and Mr. D. Chakraborty, learned counsel
representing respondent No. 2.
2. The applicant Jatin Panging has filed an application under Section 389(2) of the Cr.PC.
The applicant was convicted vide judgment & order dated 11.08.2022 in Sessions Case No.
5(S-S)/2021 under Sections 448 IPC and sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for 1
year and he was convicted under Section 376 IPC and sentenced to undergo Rigorous
Imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine
to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 6 months.
3. I have considered the submissions at the Bar. The victim has filed an affidavit stating
that she has no objection if the petitioner is enlarged on bail. It is also submitted through the
affidavit that some exaggerated version was deposed by her during trial under compelling
circumstances which was beyond her control.
4. The learned Addl. P.P. has raised serious objection against the bail petition stating that
the applicant is convicted under a serious offence and this case is proved against him beyond
reasonable doubt.
5. It is submitted on behalf of the applicant that the evidence of the victim clearly reveals
that she was closely acquainted with the applicant. The evidence of the victim reveals that
applicant expressed his love for her and the victim used to chat with the applicant. Her
husband was not present at the time of the incident but her children were at home and it is
not possible for anybody to commit rape on a woman in presence of her children. After the
alleged incident when the applicant was leaving, the victim's sister-in-law allegedly saw the
applicant coming out from the victim's house. It is also submitted that the evidence of the
victim does not inspire confidence because she has stated that the police has seized the torn
Page No.# 3/3
blouse. The seizure list clearly reveals that a black coloured blouse was seized. It is not
mentioned in the seizure list that the blouse was torn. The victim was immediately examined
after the incident by the doctor, but no injuries were detected. It is also submitted that the
petitioner will be present and he will oblige with the decision of this Court after the appeal is
disposed of.
6. In view of my foregoing discussions, the applicant is enlarged on bail of Rs. 50,000/-
with a suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and the trial Court
may impose conditions which he or she deems fit and proper. The operation of the conviction
and sentence vide judgment & order dated 11.08.2022 passed by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Sivasagar in Sessions Case No. 5(S-S)/2021 is suspended until further
order(s).
In terms of the above, the petition is disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
