Sri Chiranjit Das @ Jay And Ors vs The State Of Tripura
2021 Latest Caselaw 657 Tri

                    HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                          AGARTALA
                             AB 38 2021

Sri Chiranjit Das @ Jay and Ors                ---------- Petitioner(s)
                            Versus
The State of Tripura
                                               ------- Respondent(s)
                            BEFORE
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G. CHATTOPADHYAY
For Petitioner(s)    : Ms. S.Chakraborty, Adv.
                       Mr. R.G.Chakraborty, Adv.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.Debnath, Addl. PP.

                               ORDER

02.07.2021 [1] This bail application has been filed under Section 438

of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C. hereunder) for

granting pre -arrest bail to the petitioners who are FIR named

accused in Kakraban P.S. case No.37 of 2021 under Sections 457,

325,427,384 read with Section 34 IPC which has been registered on

the basis of the FIR lodged by Smt. Sibani Chakraborty (Roy) of

Rajarbag, Udaipur.

[2] The informant lodged the FIR with the Officer -in-

charge, of Kakraban Police Station on 12.06.2011 alleging, inter

alia, that on 11.06.2011 at around 10 O'clock in the night, the

petitioners broke open the gate of the dwelling house of the

informant and they first entered into the Puja room of the house

where they damaged the articles including the electric bulbs.

Thereafter, they entered into the bed room of the elder brother of the

informant and assaulted him. As a result of their assault, the elder

brother of the informant received multiple injuries in his body.

Allegedly, the petitioners did not even spare the old and ailing

mother of the informant who came to save the life of her son. The

old lady was also assaulted by the petitioners. After committing

assault on the elder brother and mother of the informant, the

petitioners robbed them of a cash sum of Rs.9,000/-

[3] When the neighbouring people appeared in their house

for their rescue, the petitioners left. Thereafter, the injured were

taken to hospital in critical condition where they received treatment

as indoor patient.

[4] Based on the FIR of said Smt. Sibani Chakraborty, the

case was registered and investigation of the case was taken up.

Apprehending arrest the petitioners have approached this court

seeking pre arrest bail.

[5] Heard Ms.S.Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing for

the petitioners. It is submitted by Ms.Chakraborty, learned counsel

that all the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case out of

political rivalry of the informant towards the petitioners. Referring to

the judgment of the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar vs. State of

Bihar and Another reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273 Ms.

Chakraborty, learned counsel argues that the investigating agency

must issue notice under Section 41 Cr.P.C to the petitioners before

arresting them. No notice has yet been issued to the petitioners.

According to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, the

innocent petitioners should be protected from unnecessary arrest and

detention by granting pre arrest bail to them. Learned counsel,

therefore, urges the court by to allow their bail petition.

[6] Mr.S.Debnath, learned Addl. PP vehemently opposes

the bail application. It is contended by Mr.Debnath, learned Addl. PP

that the accused petitioners deliberately committed the offence. They

entered into the house of their neighbour at about 10 O'clock in the

night with deadly weapons and assaulted the innocent inmates of the

house. They did not even spare the oldest house inmate who came to

save the life of her son. It is contended by Mr.Debnath, learned Addl

PP that custodial interrogation of the petitioners is necessary to know

their real intention of committing the offence. Learned counsel,

urges the court for rejecting the bail application.

[7] Considered the submissions of learned counsel

representing the parties. Perused the entire case record including the

case diary. The investigating agency by this time has recorded the

police statements of the material witnesses of the case under Section

161 Cr.P.C. It is on record that after the alleged incident occurred,

the injured persons were taken to the hospital in critical condition

and they remained admitted in hospital over a considerable period of

time. The allegations are very serious and there are materials on

record supporting such allegations. The prosecution has been able to

make out a good prima facie case against the petitioners which need

to be thoroughly investigated.

[8] Possibility of their influencing the witnesses in the

event of their release on bail cannot be ruled out. Looking to the

nature of the offence, the manner in which it was committed and

materials available in support of involvement of the petitioners in the

alleged offence, this court is of the view that the accused petitioners

do not deserve pre arrest bail at this pre-mature stage of the

investigation.

In view of the above, the bail petition stands rejected.

Return the CD.

JUDGE

Saikat Sarma, PA