Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 23786 (GAU)

Vimal Kumar Bajaj v. The State of AP

IA(Crl)/121/2025 · 2025-12-19

Budi Habung

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC040020972025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : IA(Crl)/121/2025 Vimal Kumar Bajaj Son of Hukmi Chand Bajaj, a permanent resident of Ward No. 01 Digambar Chowk, East Jorhat, Assam 785001 VERSUS The State of AP represented by the PP of AP Advocate for the Petitioner : Kemo Lollen, Arun Yun,Maryum Sora,D Ado,Geli Taye Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BUDI HABUNG ORDER Date : 20-12-2025 Heard Mr. K. Lollen, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. G. Tado, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. By an order dated 04.09.2025, the applicant/petitioner was granted interim anticipatory bail with certain conditions, including conditions No.4, “that the accused applicant shall not leave the State of Arunachal Page No.# 2/3 Pradesh without prior permission from the concerned jurisdictional court” and by subsequent order dated 12.09.2025, the said interim anticipatory bail was made absolute with same terms and conditions. 3. It is submitted that the applicant is a permanent resident of Jorhat, Assam, and his mother is suffering from illness, for which, he needed to go there for her treatment. It is further submitted that though he made an application before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Daporijo, a permission was granted only for 20(twenty) days with a direction to report back immediately after 20(twenty) days causing hardship to the petitioner. 4. By filing this interlocutory application, the applicant seeks modification of the conditions No.4 of the bail order to enable him to go out of the State of Arunachal Pradesh. 5. Mr. G. Tado, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has no objection to the prayer made by the applicant provided that the applicant is directed to appear before the I.O. of the case as and when called for. 6. In view of the above and considering the submission made, the condition No.4 of the bail order requires suitable relaxation. 7. Accordingly, the condition No.4 of the bail order dated 04.09.2025 and 12.09.2025, passed in AB No.121(AP)/2025 is hereby modified to the extent that the applicant/petitioner shall be permitted to travel outside the State of Arunachal Pradesh without any restriction on the conditions Page No.# 3/3 that he provide his present address at Assam and his mobile number to the I.O. of the case and appear before the I.O. as and when called for. 8. With the above modification, this interlocutory application stands allowed and dispose of. 9. The applicant shall furnish copy of this order to the I.O. of the case. JUDGE Comparing Assistant