Pima Lingdum @ Lingdum vs. The State Of Ap

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC040010752021

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH)

Case No. : AB 179/2021

1:Pima Lingdum @ Lingdum W/o Shri Lingdum Tarong, A Resident of Village Pichola, P.O/PS Banderdewa, District Papum Pare, Arunachal Pradesh.

VERSUS

1:THE STATE OF AP Through the Public Prosecutor

Advocate for the Petitioner : Regum Nabam

Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP

BEFORE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN

ORDER

Date : 12-11-2021

Pursuant to the order dated 10.11.2021, Mr. T. Ete, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the Case Diary of Itanagar Women Police Case No. 166/2021, registered under Sections 324/498A/34 of the IPC, before this Court. Perused the same with the assistance of Mr. T. Ete, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for consideration of the petition under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C., filed by the accused applicant, namely, Smti Pima Lingdum @ Lingdum Pema for grant of pre-arrest bail.

Heard Mr. R. Nabam, learned counsel for the accused. Also heard Mr. T. Ete, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Arunachal Pradesh.

Considering the materials collected so far in the Case Diary and also, considering the nature of accusation and the punishment prescribed for the same, this Court is left unconvinced that custodial interrogation of the accused is necessary in the interest of investigation. Accordingly, it is provided that in the event of arrest of the accused applicant, namely, Smti Pima Lingdum @ Lingdum Pema in connection with Itanagar Women Police Case No. 166/2021, under Sections 324/498A/34 of the IPC, she shall be released on pre-arrest bail on her executing a bond of Rs.10,000/- with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of arresting authority.

The above privilege is, however, subject to the following conditions;

(i). That the applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required;

(ii). That the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and

(iii). That the applicant shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Yupia, without prior

permission.

The anticipatory bail application stands disposed of.

Send back the Case Diary.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant