Achyut Moran vs State Of Assam

The Court proceedings have been conducted through remote video conferencing mode due to the prevailing situation in the State due to Covid-19

pandemic. Heard Mr. S. Islam, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. T.K. Misra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent State

of Assam.

By this application under Section 438, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), the petitioner viz. Achyut Moran has approached this Court seeking

the benefit of pre-arrest bail, apprehending his arrest, in connection with Digboi Police Station Case no. 89/2021, registered under Sections

120B/153A/295A/502(2), Indian Penal Code (IPC) read with Section 67 of Information Technology Act, 2000.

The informant is a Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) from Digboi Legislative Assembly Constituency. He has made accusations in the FIR

dated 30.03.2021 that since last 1 (one) month the petitioner had made some statements through his Facebook account, which according to the

informant, were derogatory and provocative in nature. On perusal of the contents of the First Information Report (FIR), it transpires that the informant

had laid foundation stones for different Namghars and the petitioner had made some comments with regard to non-completion of constructions of such

Namghars. The informant has alleged that the petitioner, by making such statements, had tried to promote enmity between different groups and casted

aspersion against the informant and his party members and the same might cause disharmony or feelings of enmity amongst common people against

the informant and his party members.

I have considered the accusations made in the FIR. The informant has not specifically provided the contents of statements alleged to have been made

by the petitioner in his Facebook account. It appears that the accusations are with regard to laying of foundation stones for different Namghars and

thereafter, not completing the same in due time. Pursuant to the interim order dated 11.05.2021, the petitioner has appeared before the Investigating

Officer (I.O.) of the case and the I.O. has recorded his statement, as has been submitted by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor on the basis of

the materials in the case diary available with.

Having gone through the contents of the FIR and the materials available in the case diary, as have been referred to by the learned Additional Public

Prosecutor, I find that the same do not prima facie reveal the ingredients of the offences defined under Section 153A, Section 295A and Section

505(2) of the IPC.

In view of the above fact situation, I am of the considered view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner for the purpose of carrying out

investigation is not necessary and his release on pre-arrest bail, at this stage of investigation, is not likely to cause any prejudicial effect in the further

investigation of the case, provided he continues to extend his assistance and co-operation in the further investigation of the case.

Accordingly, the interim protection granted to the petitioner by order dated 11.05.2021 is hereby made absolute, subject to the conditions that :

[i] the petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation whenever required by the Investigating Officer

(I.O.) of the case;

[ii] the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any witness acquainted with the facts of the case so as to

dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer; and

[iii] the petitioner shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the

police.

The bail application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.