Case Law Details
Rohul Amin Vs State of Assam (Gauhati High Court)
Gauhati High Court held that rejected the pre-arrest bail as the informant referred to mobile call screenshots which project that the petitioner repeatedly called him to mount pressure to compromise the matter.
Facts- The petitioner, Rohul Amin, who is apprehending arrest in connection with Boko P.S. case under sections 120B/420/406/386/403/506 of IPC, is seeking pre-arrest bail under section 438 Cr. P.C.
It was alleged that the petitioner had committed fraud by projecting himself to be the proprietor of the firm under the name and style of M/s. NRI Group of Companies and M/s. Zentic Pharmaceuticals and obtained GSTIN in his name and had prepared fake invoices to show as if he had sold bricks to the petitioner at Delhi and a sum of Rs. 1,07,17,000/- was due from Anjuman Kumar Sharma.
In the instant application, the petitioner has stated on oath that (i) he was the proprietor of NRI Group of Companies; and Anjuman Kumar Sharma had helped him to set up the industry; and (iii) Anjuman Kumar Sharma procured huge quantity of bricks. Thus, it is submitted that it is absurd that Anjuman Kumar Sharma, being a co-owner would purchase bricks from his own firm.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
