Balwan Bham And Anr v. The State Of Assam Rep. By Pp, Assam

GAHC010124862022 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1749/2022 BALWAN BHAM AND ANR S/O. LT. MONOHAR LAL BHAMA,2: YOUDHISTRA BHAMA S/O. SRI BALWAN BHAMA BOTH R/O. HOUSE NO. 35-A BONGAON NEAR INCOME TAX RESIDENTIAL COLONY BELTOLA P.S. BASISTHA PIN-781022 DIST. KAMRUP (M) ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY PP, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S H ZAMAN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM BEFOREHONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKANORDER 13.09.2023 Heard Mr. A. Ahmed, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Addl. P.P. for the State respondent. 2. Apprehending arrest in connection with Basistha PS Case No. 207/2022, under Sections 120[B]/468/471/420 of the IPC, which was later ontransferred to BI PS Case No. 03/2023.this application under Section 438of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is preferred by applicants, namely, SriBalwan Bham and Sri Youdhistra Bhama for grant of pre-arrest bail. 3. The said case was registered on the basis of an FIR lodged by oneM. Hussain, on 14.02.2022. The essence of allegations made in the FIR is thatone Dharambir Singh, the proprietor of M/s Bittu Coal Traders in connivancewith M/s Jai Maa Coal Pvt. Ltd. where Sri Youdhistra Bhama is one of thedirectors and M/s Vaishno Devi Traders Pvt. Ltd. where Sri Balwan Bhama is oneof the directors have repared fake bill trading [sales] and thereby evaded tax. 4. Mr. Ahmed, learned counsel for the applicants submits that pursuantto the order of this court dated 23.06.2022, the applicants have appearedbefore the IO and their statements are recordedand that they have been co-operating with the Investigating Agency and, therefore, contended to make theinterim order, dated 23.06.2022, absolute in the same terms and conditions. Mr.Ahmed further submits that the applicants have filed another petition, underSection 482 of the Cr.P.C., for quashing the FIR dated 14.02.2022, and thisCourt was pleased to stay the further investigation of the case, vide order dated25.07.2022, in Criminal Petition No. 693/2022. 5. On the other Mr. Borthakur, learned Addl. P.P. by producing the casediary before this court, submits that the further investigation of the case hasstayed by this Court, in Criminal Petition No. 693/2022. 6. Having heard the submissions of learned Advocates of both sides, Ihave carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on recordand also perused the Case Diary with the assistance of learned Additional PublicProsecutor. 7. Having regards to above and also having heard the submission oflearned counsel for both the parties and also considering the facts andcircumstances on the record and the nature of accusation and the punishmentprescribed for the same this court is of the view that custodial interrogation ofthe applicants seems to be unwarranted in this case and therefore, this court isinclined to make the interim order dated 23.06.2022, absolute in the sameterms and condition. 8. In terms of above this AB stands disposed of. 9. The case diary be returned. JUDGE Comparing Assistant