MITHUN DEBBARMA Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel, Mr. S. Lodh is present for the petitioner-applicants. Learned P.P., Mr. Raju Datta along with Mr. S. Ghosh, Learned Addl. P.P. are present on behalf of the State-respondent.

(2.) In pursuance of the order dtd. 18/10/2024 Learned P.P. has produced the Case Diary. This application under Sec. 482 of B.N.S. is filed by the present petitioner-applicants for releasing the petitioners on pre-arrest bail in connection with Mandwai P.S. Case No.4/2024 registered under Sec. 329(4)/324(4)/305(A)/351(2)/3(5) of BNS, 2023 read with Sec. 27(1) of the Arms Act, 1959 with added Sec. 310(2)/115(2) of BNS, 2023.

(3.) In course of hearing, Learned counsel for the petitioner-applicants submitted that the petitioner-applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. He first of all drawn the attention of the Court referring the contents of the FIR and submitted that from the contents of the FIR there is no allegation that the petitioner-applicants have committed any offence under Sec. 27(1) of Arms Act as because there was no allegation that they have used any fire arms. Learned counsel further submitted that if during investigation it reveals that they possessed any fire arms, in that case, maximum the charge under Sec. 25 of Arms Act can be established against the accused-petitioners for which there is no scope to detain the accused-petitioners in custody and other provisions of the BNS does not reveal any allegation showing custodial interrogation or detention of the accused-petitioners in custody. So, Learned counsel for the petitioner-applicants submitted that this criminal prosecution has been filed just to harass the present petitioner-applicants in this case.