Atung Flago Taniang v. The State of Ap

ORDER Date : 22.02.2023

Heard Mr. A. Bodo, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. T. Ete, learned Public Prosecutor for the State of Arunachal Pradesh.

This is an application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Page No.# 2/4 Procedure, 1973, for grant of bail to the accused, who has been languishing in jail hazot in connection with Rupa P.S. Case No. 21/2022, under Sections 120(B)/170/186/353/364(A)/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 15(1)/16B/18 of UAP Act.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. A. Bodo, that the accused was arrested in connection with the present case on 06.12.2022 and since then he is behind the bar. Further it is submitted that the another co-accused, Shri Micheal Tajo, has already been granted bail by this Court yesterday, i.e. on 21.02.2023, in BA No. 12/2023, and accordingly prayed to consider the bail prayer for the present accused on the ground of parity. Further it is submitted that the present accused was not at all involved in any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. Further it is submitted that on 23.01.2023, a petition for bail was moved before the learned Sessions Judge, Bomdila, but the same was rejected and hence the present petition has been filed seeking bail for the present accused. It is also submitted that the victim has already arrived at an amicable settlement with the prime accused-Shri Micheal Tajo. Further it is submitted that the present accused is a permanent resident of his addressed locality and hence there is no chance of absconding if the accused is enlarged on bail. More so, he will regularly appear before the learned Court below and will co-operate in the trial of the case. The accused is behind the bar since

06.12.2022 and considering his length of detention also, the accused be released on bail.

In this context, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr. T. Ete, also submitted that the co-accused has already been released on bail yesterday, i.e. Page No.# 3/4 on 21.02.2023, in BA No. 12/2023, considering the amicable settlement arrived at between the parties and hence, considering the length of detention and on the ground of parity, the bail petition for the present accused can also be considered.

After hearing the submissions of learned counsels of both sides, I have perused the LCR, which is available before this Court as it was called for in connection with BA/12/2023.

It is an admitted fact that the accused is behind the bar for last 75 days and hence, I find that further custodial detention of the present accused is not necessary and in the same time, also considering the amicable settlement arrived at between the prime accused and the victim as well as other aspects of the case, I find that further custodial interrogation of the accused seems to be not necessary here in this case.

Accordingly, it is provided that on furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) only with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Bomdila, the accused, namely, Shri Joy Flago, be enlarged on bail, subject to the following conditions:

(i) that the accused shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required;

(ii) that the accused shall not, directly or indirectly, make any Page No.# 4/4 inducement, threat or promise to any person 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) that the accused shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned Sessions Judge, Bomdila, without prior permission.

In terms of above, this bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Page No.# 1/4 GAHC040002312023 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : BA 16/2023 1:Atung Flago Taniang S/o Shri Taffi Flago Taniang, Presently residing at Boso Colony, Seppa, PO/PS Seppa, District East Kameng, Arunachal Pradesh and presently residing at P Sector, Itanagar, Arunachal Pradesh. VERSUS 1:THE STATE OF AP Representing through the Public Prosecutor, Arunachal Pradesh. Advocate for the Petitioner : T Torum Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP BEFORE HONBLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA