INVESTIGATING OFFICER & OFFICER-IN-CHARGE Vs. PROHLAD HAJONG AND ORS
LAWS(MEGH)-2013-10-10
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
Decided on October 23,2013

Investigating Officer And Officer-In-Charge Appellant
VERSUS
Prohlad Hajong And Ors Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) This Court passed an order dated 25.04.2013 rejecting the anticipatory bail application i.e. A.B.(SH)No.38/2013 filed by the respondents-accused namely, Shri.Prohlad Hajong, Smti. Konica Hajong and Shri.Rinku Hajong. In that order, the Court did not give any direction to the respondents-accused to surrender before the competent court or to the Investigating Officer. In other words, the Court simply passed the said order dated 24.05.2013 rejecting the said anticipatory bail application i.e. A.B. (SH)No.38/2013. After the rejection of the said anticipatory bail application i.e. A.B.(SH)No.38/2013, the respondents-accused had surrendered in the court of the Additional District Magistrate (J), West Garo Hills, Tura. It appears that the Additional District Magistrate (J), West Garo Hills, Tura had not been informed by the lawyer appearing for the respondents-accused correctly the earlier order of this Court dated 25.04.2013.
(2.) The learned Additional District Magistrate (J), West Garo Hills, Tura, had passed the order dated 26.04.2013 granting anticipatory bail to the respondents-accused even if this Court by the said order dated 25.04.2013 had rejected the anticipatory bail application filed by the respondentsaccused. This Court is compelled to make observation that no doubt the accused has the right to file the repeatedly bail applications but the subsequent bail application can be filed only when there is subsequent development. In the present case, it appears that there were no changes or subsequent developments but the learned Additional District Magistrate (J), West Garo Hills, Tura passed the perfunctory order dated 26.04.2013 for granting anticipatory bail to the respondents-accused. This Court in Criminal Revision Petition i.e. Crl. Revn.P.No.(SH)372013 filed against the said perfunctory order of the Additional District Magistrate (J), West Garo Hills, Tura dated 26.04.2013, made a very serious observations against the learned Additional District Magistrate (J), West Garo Hills, Tura vide order dated 13.05.2013 passed in Crl.Revn.P.No.(SH)37/2013. This Court also expressed displeasure and anguish against the concerned Magistrate i.e. the Additional District Magistrate (J), West Garo Hills, Tura for passing the said perfunctory order dated 26.04.2013 for granting anticipatory bail to the respondents-accused.
(3.) This Court by the said order dated 13.05.2013 made a direction that all the bail applications moved before any court should be supported by an affidavit stating whether the bail applications moved earlier with result, secondly, whether any bail application moved before the Higher Court with result, thirdly, whether any bail application is pending before the Higher Court and also to annex a copy of the order passed by the respective Courts.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.