Atowar Rahman vs. The State Of Assam
Held
The Court held that the petitioner had already appeared before the Investigating Officer (I.O.) pursuant to the Court's order dated 23.05.2022, and his statement had been recorded. The Court also noted that the I.O. had made substantial progress in the investigation. In the absence of any materials in the case diary indicating that the petitioner had misused his liberty after being granted interim pre-arrest bail, the Court was of the considered view that custodial interrogation was not warranted in the interest of investigation. Consequently, the Court was inclined to make the interim order dated 23.05.2022 absolute in the same terms and conditions. The application for anticipatory bail was disposed of in terms of this decision.
Facts
The petitioner, Atowar Rahman, sought pre-arrest bail apprehending arrest in connection with Dhubri P.S. Case No. 228/2022, registered under Sections 379/420/406 of the Indian Penal Code. The FIR was lodged by a police officer who intercepted a 12-wheeler truck loaded with coal. The driver failed to produce documents like GST challan and E-Way bill. The petitioner had previously appeared before the Investigating Officer (I.O.) pursuant to an interim order from the High Court and his statement was recorded. He claimed to be cooperating with the investigation and sought to make the interim order absolute.
Key Issues
1. Whether the interim order granting pre-arrest bail to the petitioner should be made absolute, considering the petitioner's cooperation with the investigation and the progress made by the I.O. (mixed question of law and fact). Petitioner's Arguments: - The petitioner has appeared before the I.O. as directed by this Court's order dated 23.05.2022. - His statement has been recorded, and he has been cooperating with the investigating agency. - Therefore, the interim order should be made absolute on the same terms and conditions. Revenue/State's Arguments: - The custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary in the interest of investigation. - The State opposed the petition.
Sections Cited
Section 438
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER 25.07.2022
Heard N. Uddin, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. N. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the State respondent. Apprehending arrest in connection with Dhubri P. S. Case No. 228/2022, under Sections 379/420/406 of the Indian Penal Code, this application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is preferred by applicant, namely, Atowar Rahman,
Page No.# 2/3 for grant of pre-arrest bail. It is to be noted here that Dhubri P. S. Case No. 228/2022, under
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Gauhati High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.