Biswajit Palit, J
[1] Learned counsel, Mr. S. Lodh is present for the petitioner-applicants. Learned P.P., Mr. Raju Datta along with Mr. S. Ghosh, Learned Addl. P.P. are present on behalf of the State-respondent.
[2] In pursuance of the order dated 18.10.2024 Learned P.P. has produced the Case Diary. This application under Section 482 of B.N.S. is filed by the present petitioner-applicants for releasing the petitioners on pre-arrest bail in connection with Mandwai P.S. Case No.4/2024 registered under Section 329(4)/324(4)/305(A)/351(2)/3(5) of BNS, 2023 read with Section 27(1) of the Arms Act, 1959 with added Section 310(2)/115(2) of BNS, 2023.
[3] In course of hearing, Learned counsel for the petitioner-applicants submitted that the petitioner-applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. He first of all drawn the attention of the Court referring the contents of the FIR and submitted that from the contents of the FIR there is no allegation that the petitioner-applicants have committed any offence under Section 27(1) of Arms Act as because there was no allegation that they have used any fire arms. Learned counsel further submitted that if during investigation it reveals that they possessed any fire arms, in that case, maximum the charge under Section 25 of Arms Act can be established against the accused-petitioners for which there is no scope to detain the accused-petitioners in custody and other provisions of the BNS does not reveal any allegation showing custodial interrogation or detention of the accused-petitioners in custody. So, Learned counsel for the petitioner-applicants submitted that this criminal prosecution has been filed just to harass the present petitioner-applicants in this case.
[4] Furthermore, Learned counsel for the petitioner-applicants also drawn the attention of the Court that the present informant of this case is also one of the accused in connection with Case No.PRC(WP)401/2017 (Annexure-7) and also referring Annexure-8 i.e. the order dated 21.05.2018 delivered by Learned Addl. CJM, West Tripura, Agartala, he also drawn the attention of the Court that the said accused surrendered before the Court and was released on bail. Learned counsel further drawn the attention of the Court referring Annexure-9 and submitted that an work order was issued in favour of Sunil Debbarma who is one of the petitioner in this case and the informant of this case had demanded a huge sum from him to execute the work but as the said accused-petitioner failed to repay the amount, so this prosecution have been lodged against him just to harass him and to undermine his status in the locality. It was further submitted by the petitioner that some other accused persons were also produced before the Court who were later on released on bail. Learned counsel also submitted that if the prayer of the petitioner-applicants is not considered then they shall suffer irreparable loss and would be highly prejudiced. So, Learned counsel urged for releasing the petitioner-applicants on pre-arrest bail on any condition.
[5] On the other hand, Learned P.P. appearing for the State-respondent strongly opposed the bail application and drawn the attention of the Court that the IO could collect some materials against the petitioners. So, at this stage, there is no scope to release the petitioners on pre-arrest bail.
Heard both the sides at length.
[6] The gist in the FIR in short is that one Ramananda Debbarma laid an FIR to O/C Mandwai P.S. on 25.07.2024 alleging inter alia that on 24.07.2024 Wednesday in the evening at around 4.30 p.m. a group of miscreants suddenly came to his house and broken his car bearing registration No.TR01-BC-0439 and after that, they entered into his house and broken the gas, T.V., showcase, etc. and after hearing the noise, he came there from another room when he found that a man was trying to shoot from a pistol but somehow he managed to escape from the spot by breaking the bamboo door of the house and after that, they threatened his wife Sabita Debbarma and his daughter to kill them and while leaving, they took cash amount to Rs.47,000/-with them and that time, he could identify the accused Parimal Debbarma, Mithun Debbarma, Sunil Debbarma, Rakesh Debbarma, Raj Rupini, Sahid Debbarma, Birendra Debbarma and Sanjit Debbarma. Hence, he laid the FIR.
[7] I have perused the CD and the record of the Learned Court below. It appears that in course of investigation, the IO produced accused Francis Debbarma, Biswanath Debbarma, Parimal Debbarma before the Learned Court below. The present case is registered under Section 329(4)/ 324(4)/305(A)/351(2)/3(5) of BNS, 2023 read with Section 27(1) of the Arms Act, 1959 against the present petitioner and others. The investigation of the case is in progress. From the statement of witnesses so far collected by IO up to this stage of investigation nowhere I find that there is any evidence on record showing that the present petitioners have committed dacoity or they have used any arms for showing their implication with the alleged offence of dacoity and Arms Act to enable the Court to allow the IO for their custodial interrogation and detention in custody at this stage. Even there is no specific evidence on record that the accused petitioners have snatched Rs.47,000/-from the residence of the informant. The evidence so far collected by IO up to this stage prima facie appears to be the evidence of committing mischief, along with criminal trespass and also the evidence of criminal intimidation by the petitioners and others.
[8] So, considering the materials on record I do not find any scope to disallow the application for pre-arrest bail filed by the present accused-petitioners. Hence, the application for pre-arrest bail filed by the present petitioners is hereby allowed. The accused-petitioners may go on bail for an amount of Rs.25,000/- each with one surety of like amount in the event of their arrest to the satisfaction of O/C Mandwai P.S. on condition that they shall made available before the IO for interrogation for the sake of investigation as and when called for and they shall not make any attempt to temper evidence on record of the prosecution nor they shall leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission of the concerned jurisdictional Magistrate.
With this observation the present bail application is disposed of.
A copy of this order be furnished to Learned counsel for the accused-petitioners in course of the day. A copy of this order be communicated to IO through Learned P.P. along with the Case Diary.
Send down the LCR along with a copy of this order.
