Haradhan Banik & Ors vs State Of Tripura

S.G. Chattopadhyay, J

[1] This bail application has been filed under section 438 Cr.P.C for granting pre arrest bail to the petitioners who are accused in NCC PS case No. 2021 NCC 076 registered under sections 447, 506, 324 and 382 (B) read with section 34 IPC.

[2] Genesis of the case is rooted in the FIR which was lodged by Lokranjan Chanda of Joynagar, Agartala with the officer in charge of Capital Complex police station, Agartala alleging, inter alia, that the accused petitioners being led by accused Haradhan Banik obstructed the complainant from measuring his Jote land at Indranagar when he went to there at about 10.30 am on 01.08.2021 for the purpose of measuring his land for sale. The accused petitioners attacked the complainant and his wife with deadly weapons and during the attack they had also robbed his wife of a gold chain and cash of Rs.9,100/-.

[3] On the basis of the said FIR case was registered and investigation was taken up. In the course of investigation, police conducted raid in the house of the accused petitioners for arresting them.

[4] Apprehending arrest, the petitioners have approached this court seeking pre arrest bail.

[5] Heard Mr. H.K. Bhowmik, learned advocate who submits that other than section 382 (B) IPC, all the charges brought against the accused petitioners are bailable. Counsel also contends that the accused petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case out of a long standing rivalry between the parties. Counsel urges for their pre-arrest bail.

[6] Mr. S. Debnath, learned Addl. P.P. on the other hand opposes the bail application of Haradhan Banik, accused who allegedly masterminded the attack on the complainant and his family members and motivated the other accused persons to commit the crime. It is, therefore, submitted by Mr. Debnath, learned Addl. P.P. that release of accused petitioner Haradhan Banik on bail will spoil the investigation of the case. Learned Addl. P.P., therefore, urges the court for rejecting the bail application.

[7] Prosecution has submitted the case diary before me. Perused the case diary and all other materials available on record. Considered the submissions of the counsel appearing for the parties.

[8] It appears from the record that a good prima facie case has been made out against accused petitioner Haradhan Banik. Allegations are serious which needs a full and fair investigation. In view of the nature of allegations, the materials available on record against petitioner Haradhan Banik and the role played by the said accused in the commission of the alleged offence, this court is of the view that he does not deserve pre arrest bail at this stage of the case.

[9] Considering the materials available against the other accused petitioners, pre arrest bail is granted to accused Sudip Saha, Sri Alak Saha, Sri Khokan Deb (Bhola), Debabrata Debnath (Prabhat), Sujit Deb, Prabhal Bhattacharjee and Dipak Dey. In the event of their arrest, these accused petitioners other than accused Haradhan Banik shall be released on bail on their furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- each with one surety of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the I.O on condition that they will cooperate in the investigation and they will not try to influence any of the witnesses of the case in any manner.

In terms of the above, the bail petition stands disposed of.