Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 17262 (GAU)

MANAB MADHUR DAS v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

Bail Appln./2568/2025 · 2025-08-18

Mitali Thakuria

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010175112025 2025:GAU-AS:10978 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2568/2025 MANAB MADHUR DAS S/O PABAN DAS R/O VILL- PANIBHARAL, P.O. PANIBHARAL, PIN-784176, P.S. BISWANATH CHARIALI, DIST. BISWANATH, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P BORDOLOI, MS M NIROLA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER 19-08-2025 Heard Mr. P. Bordoloi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, for the State respondent. 2. This is an application under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of bail to the accused/petitioner, who was arrested in connection with Tezpur P.S. Page No.# 2/4 Case No. 403/2025 under Sections 105/238(c)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023. 3. Case Diary is placed before the Court. Perused the same. 4. It is submitted by Mr. Bordoloi, learned counsel that the petitioner is the owner of Amolapam Mamta Rehabilitation Centre and he started the Centre recently and that the Registration Certificate was also issued to that effect to the said Rehabilitation Centre. 5. It is admitted that one person had died in the said Rehab Centre, but when he was critical, they shifted him to B. K. Hospital and they were about to shift the person to Tezpur Civil Hospital for post mortem examination and during that process only on getting the information, police arrived and the person got arrested in connection with this case. 6. Further, the petitioner is in custody since last 72 days and hence, there may be sufficient progress in the investigation of the case and considering his length of detention, he may be enlarged on bail. 7. However, the petitioner is ready and willing to extend his cooperation in the investigation of the case, if he is granted with the privilege of bail. 8 Mr. Borthakur, learned Addl. PP submitted in this regard that the post mortem report is available with the case diary, but the cause of death is yet to be ascertained and FSL report could not be collected by the I.O. till date. 9. He further submitted that as per the materials available in the case diary, said Rehab Centre was running without any proper Registration No. and from the note of the Joint Director, it is also seen that the said Rehab Centre was also not established under the Clinical Establishment Act, 2010, which is required and from the letter of the Director of Social Welfare, it is also seen that they did not receive any prior notice regarding establishment of the said Rehab Centre. Page No.# 3/4 10. Mr. Borthakur, learned Addl. PP accordingly, raised objection in enlarging the accused petitioner on bail, at this stage. 11. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and I have also perused the case diary and other annexures appended with this petition. 12. It is an admitted fact that a person had died in the said Rehab Centre and he was declared brought dead while he was taken to hospital for treatment by the said Rehab Centre. But considering all other aspects including the length of detention already undergone by the petitioner, I find that further custodial detention of the petitioner may not be necessary for further investigation of the case and accordingly, I find it to be a fit case to grant the privilege of bail to the accused petitioner. 13. Accordingly, the accused/petitioner, namely, Shri Manab Madhur Das, be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand), only with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned CJM, Sonitpur, Tezpur, subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the petitioner shall fully co-operate with the investigation of the case and shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required in connection with the investigation of the aforesaid P.S. Case and (ii) that the petitioner 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/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. Page No.# 4/4 14. With the above observation and direction, this bail application stands disposed of. 15. Return the Case Diary herewith. JUDGE Comparing Assistant