Facts
Seven petitioners, all accused in FIR No. 161(8)2023 TBL PS, filed applications for anticipatory bail.
Source reference: para. 2-3The FIR alleged offenses under Sections 448 (house-trespass), 427 (mischief), 380 (theft), 325 (grievous hurt), 384 (extortion), and 34 (common intention) of the IPC.
Source reference: para. 3On 20-10-2023 and 25-10-2023, the High Court granted interim pre-arrest bail to the petitioners subject to conditions of cooperation and furnishing bail bonds.
Source reference: para. 4-5The State subsequently submitted a report from the Thoubal Police Station dated 16-05-2026 confirming that the accused had joined the investigation and their statements were recorded.
Source reference: para. 6Issues
1. Whether the interim pre-arrest bail granted to the petitioners should be made absolute based on their cooperation with the investigation and the lack of necessity for custodial interrogation.
Source reference: para. 7-8Law Applied
The Court primarily applied the principles governing the grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), focusing on whether the accused are cooperating with the investigation and whether custodial interrogation is indispensable for the probe.
Source reference: para. 6, 8The court relied on the Investigating Officer's (IO) report to determine if the petitioners fulfilled the conditions of the interim bail orders previously granted.
Source reference: para. 6Reasoning
The Court examined the updated status report submitted by the Officer In-charge of the Thoubal Police Station which explicitly stated that all seven petitioners appeared before the IO on 23-11-2023, participated in interrogations, and had their statements recorded.
Source reference: para. 6The prosecution, represented by the Public Prosecutor, conceded that the petitioners were fully cooperating with the investigation and that the police did not require custodial interrogation to proceed with the case.
Source reference: para. 6, 8Because the primary objectives of the investigation involving the accused were being met without the need for detention, the Court reasoned that the interim protection should be finalized.
Source reference: para. 9Holding
The Court answered the issue in the affirmative, holding that the petitioners were entitled to permanent pre-arrest bail.
The High Court made absolute the interim orders dated 20-10-2023 and 25-10-2023, thereby disposing of AB No. 39 of 2023 and AB No. 40 of 2023, and closed the connected miscellaneous cases.
Source reference: para. 9Original Court PDF
SOIBAM JAMINIKANTA SINGH AND 4 OTHERSvsOFFICER IN CHARGE, THOUBAL POLICE STATION AND 4 OTHERS
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in