High CourtsSingle Bench

Tingus G. Marak vs State Of Meghalaya & Ors

Meghalaya High Court · Decided on 4 June 2026 · Citation: (2026) 06 MEG CK 0215

HON’BLE JUDGES
W. Diengdoh, J
CASE NUMBER
Anticipatory Bail No. 13 Of 2026
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 232 words

W. Diengdoh, J

1.

Mr. S.A. Sheikh, learned GA has produced the compliance report by the Investigating Officer (I/O), wherein it has been stated that the notice was issued upon the complainants, and it was explained to them that they could appoint a lawyer of their choice or to avail Legal Aid. However, they have stated that they are unable to afford the expenses required to engage a lawyer or to travel to Shillong. As such, it is prayed that necessary order may be passed in this regard.

2.

This Court has perused the said compliance report and has noted that though the complainants were informed of their right to appoint a lawyer of their choice, nothing has been stated as to whether they can avail Legal Aid. This fact not being explicit in the said report, this Court hereby directs the I/O to convey the message to the complainants that they can seek Legal Aid and further that they are not required to appear in Court personally since the concerned Legal Aid Counsel would appear on their behalf. This is to fulfil the requirement mandated in this regard.

3.

The learned GA has then sought for time to allow the I/O to take necessary steps. Prayer allowed.

4.

List this matter after 2(two) weeks.

5.

In the meantime, the interim bail granted will continue to remain in force until further orders.