Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010270982024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/3381/2024 MEGHNATH BARMAN @ RUPATAN BARMAN S/O LATE MUKUNDA BARMAN R/O VILL- BATABARI TITAGURI PART-II, P.O. ANDP.S. KOKRAJHAR DIST. KOKRAJHAR, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. S BORA, MR. P BORAH Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 03.01.2025 1. Heard Ms. S. Bora, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam. 2. This application under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Page No.# 2/4 Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Sri Meghnath Barman@ Rupatan Barman, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Kokrajhar P.S. Case No. 220/2024, under Section 296/118(2)/109 of the BNS, 2023. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 20.09.2024, one Kartik Chandra Barman, had lodged an FIR before the Officer-In-Charge of Kokrajhar police station, inter alia, alleging that the accused persons named in the FIR (the present petitioner) had disconnected the electric connection taken by the informant and as a result of which an alteration broke between the petitioner and the informant and during such altercation, it is alleged that the petitioner assaulted the son of the petitioner with a knife, causing injury on his chest. 4. It is also alleged in the FIR that the condition of the son of the informant is serious. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has fairly submitted that though there was some altercation between the petitioner and the first informant as the informant used to take illegal electric connection over the residence of the present petitioner. 6. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that though the son of the informant sustained some injuries which was simple in nature and the son of the informant is presently healthy and doing his day to day work. 7. In support of her submissions, she has furnished a copy of certificate to that effect issued by one Kamini Barman, who is the head Page No.# 3/4 Gaonbura of Batabari Titaguri Pt.-II Village. 8. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the petitioner also sustained certain injuries in the altercation and to support that she has submitted the medical report of the petitioner. She has also submitted that the petitioner is ready to cooperate in the investigation and considering the nature of offence, his custodial detention may not be necessary. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the case diary of Kokrajhar P.S. Case No. 220/2024 and has submitted that though the injury report shows that there are one stabbed injury and abrasion and laceration on forearm was found over the body of the son of the first informant, namely, Pradip Barman, however, the nature of injury is not mentioned in the medical report and it also appears that the injured was discharged after two days of hospitalization. 9. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has also submitted that in the meanwhile, the Investigating Officer has recorded the statement of relevant witnesses, including the victim. 10. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the sides as well as perused the materials available on record, inducing the case diary of Kokrajhar P.S. Case No. 220/2024. Though there are incriminating materials against the petitioner in the case diary, however, considering the fact that the investigation has fairly progressed, custodial detention of the present petitioner does not appear to be necessary if the petitioner co-operates in the investigation. Page No.# 4/4 11. In view of the above, the above-named petitioner is hereby directed to appear before the Investigating Officer of Kokrajhar P.S. Case No. 220/2024, within a period of 10(ten) days from the date of this order and co-operate in the investigation. If he does so within the stipulated period of time, in the event of his arrest in connection with the aforesaid case, he shall be allowed to go on bail of Rs. 30,000/- with a suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority with following conditions that:- (i) the petitioner shall co-operate in the investigation; and (ii) the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to the informant or to any other persons who may be acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts before the Investigating Officer or to any Court. 12. With the above observations, this anticipatory bail application is hereby disposed of. 13. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant