Shri Sanjib Kalita, & Anr. vs State of Meghalaya

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor, who has procured and produced the case diary for perusal.

The petitioners herein seek pre-arrest bail in relation to Laitumkhrah Police Station Case No. 9 (1)/2017 which has been registered for offences

under Section 380 IPC.

The aforesaid case has been registered on a report made by the Chairperson and Managing Director of North Eastern Electric Power

Corporation Limited (""NEEPCO?) on 23.01.2017 to the Superintendent of Police (City), East Khasi Hills, Shillong, the relevant contents whereof

read as under: ""Sir, This is to inform you that two persons namely Shri Naba Ram Rabha and Shri Sanjib Kalita have gained access to the

documents kept in my personal file and took copies of the same. Such an act, I construed as a theft of my official personal documents maintained

by the HR Wing of the office. These persons have falsely made allegations against me to various authorities of the Government of India and in their

complaints have enclosed copies of the documents stolen from my personal file (copy enclosed). I request you to investigate into the matter as to

how these two persons have stolen my personal documents. They should be punished as per the law along with any other person/persons that may

be revealed by the investigation as their accomplices in the crime. Thanking you

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that petitioner No. 1 had indeed made the complaints against the said informant to the Central

Vigilance Commission as also to the Public Enterprise Selection Board, particularly with a request to enquire into his educational qualifications and,

of course, with the allegations that he had submitted false declaration of educational qualification. It is further submitted that on the complaints so

made by the petitioner No. 1, in fact the statements of the petitioners were also recorded in the office of the CID, Guwahati, Ulubari on

07.05.2016 and such proceedings, according to the information of the petitioners, are still pending with the Vigilance Commission. It is the case of

the petitioners that they are being threatened in relation to the complaints so made and petitioner No. 1 is being pressurised to withdraw the

complaints, wherefor he has made a complaint to the Chairman, Human Rights Commission, Bhangagarh, Guwahati for protection of his life and

for security against such threats. It is submitted that the complaints were made as back as on 06.09.2015 and 02.01.2016 but now, only in the

month of January, 2017, the informant has lodged the FIR so as to further pressurise the petitioners. It is further submitted that so far the petitioner

No. 2 is concerned, he has no connection with the present matter; and that his name appears to have been used by some other person for filing the

complaint. It is submitted that there is no justification for arrest and detention of the petitioners and else, they are ready to cooperate with the

investigation.

Learned Public Prosecutor on the other hand submits that as per the investigation hitherto carried out, the Investigating Officer has recorded the

statements of the informant as also the employees of NEEPCO and during the course of seizure of related files of the informant, several pages have

been found missing. Therefore, according to the learned Public Prosecutor, custodial interrogation of the petitioners would be requisite.

This Court would not be making any comment on the merits of the case, but in the totality of circumstances and looking to the contents of the

first information report wherein the informant has alleged ""access"" to the documents and taking of copies thereof, which the informant has

construed"" as theft; and further looking to the fact that indisputably some complaints have been made with reference to such copies and the matter

is acquiring attention of the Central Vigilance Commission too, this Court finds it just and proper that the petitioners be extended the benefit of pre-

arrest bail at this stage itself, of course, subject to the terms and conditions and with the observations that this grant of pre-arrest bail shall not have

any bearing on any of the complaints made by both or any one of the petitioner but any action in relation to such complaints would be taken by the

concerned authorities in accordance with law.

It is also expected that the investigation of the present case shall be carried out by the Investigating Officer expeditiously and in accordance with

law.

The bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest in relation to Laitumkhrah Police Station Case No. 9

(1)/2017, the petitioners shall be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two

sureties in the sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) each to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer and subject to the conditions that:-

They shall make themselves available for interrogation by the police officer, as and when required.

They shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so

as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

They shall not leave the country without previous permission of the Court.

This anticipatory bail application stands disposed of accordingly.