Decided on October 18,1985

STATE OF ASSAM Respondents


K.N.Saikia, J. - (1.)This is an application under section 438 and/or 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for anticipatory bail in connection with Dibrugarh P.S. Case No. 474/85 under section 120(B)/407/420 I.P.C. The petitioner No. 1, Shyamlal Goel is a partner of the firm Bharat Road Link Corporation, Fancy bazaar, Gauhati and petitioner No. 2, Tek Chand Sharma, is an employee of the firm. The complainant, MIs. Satyanarayan Tea Co. (P) Ltd. delivered 197 chests of black tea for transportation to be delivered to its Warehouse named OGNUB at Diamond Harbour Road, Calcutta at owners risk and consignment Note No. DIB/003 dated 31.5.1985 was issued to Assam Maharashtra Roadways. But, thereafter Bharat Road Link Corporation was asked to carry the goods by the said Assam Maharashtra Roadways. The truck carrying the aforesaid 197 chests of black tea is stated to have met with an accident at Barasat in 24 Parganah, West Bengal wherein the truck was seized but was ultimately released and the truck with the goods reached Calcutta on 25.8.85 and the goods released on 26.8.85 and the complainant companyTs office was informed. Meanwhile the Company filed an F.I.R. on 28.8.1985 whereupon the petitioner No. 2 was called to the Police Station on 29.8.85 and was again called on 30.8.85 and 1.9.85.
(2.)The petitioners moved the Sessions Judge, Dibrugarh for anticipatory bail but the prayer was rejected observing that the Court was not in a position to hold that the consignment booked by the consignor was actually delivered to the Warehouse. Though the prayer was once rejected that by itself would not be bar to this application for anticipatory bail.
(3.)Mr. Y.K. Phukan, the learned Public Prosecutor, Assam, submits that as section 120 (B) is involved in this case, and the provisio of section 439A of the Code of Criminal Procedure is attracted an anticipatory bail can be granted only under those conditions and none of the three conditions is satisfied by the instant petitioners. Mr. Phukan further submits that petitioners neither informed the complainant nor the Police Station at Barasat about the accident or about the seizure of their goods.

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