AB 2122/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE U.B.SAHA The instant application under Section 438 Cr. P.C. is filed by the petitioner Ka ndarpa Roy, a senior Accountant of Tapattary Development Block, for granting him bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Abhayapuri Police Station ca se No. 153 of 2011 under Sections 108,120(B), 195,420,468,471,477(A),409,201 and 34 IPC read with Section 8(2) of Assam Financial Responsibility Budget Act and Section 13(1) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Heard Mr. H.R.A Choudhury, learned senior Counsel assisted by Mr. N. Hoq ue, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner who submits that in the written complaint lodged by the Project Director, DRDA, Bongaigaon to the Officer In-ch arge of Abhayapuri Police Station, it has been specifically mentioned against wh om complaint has been lodged and it would be evident from the particular column that the allegations are against one Bishnu Jyoti Baruah, not against the petiti oner. He further submits that whole allegations against the petitioner as state d in the written complaint is that he did not produce vouchers in support of th e expenditure which had reportedly been diverted by the former BDO Bishnu Jyoti Baruah. His further contention is that being the present petitioner is a Govt. e mployee, there is no possibility of his absconsion and tempering the evidence, p articularly, when all the relevant documents have been seized by the investigati ng authority. He also submits that the petitioner earlier approached this Court for gr anting him pre-arrest bail under Section 438 Cr. P.C. which was rejected by this Court on 22.6.2011 in A.B No. 1649 of 2011 as at that time, though the petition er was ill, but he could not produce any medical certificate in support of his a ilments. His further submission is that the petitioner needs his regular treatme nt, even in the Apollo Hospital, New Delhi. Mr B. S. Sinha, learned Addl P.P submits that the whole case is based o n documentary evidence and the documents which are required for the purpose of i nvestigation have already been seized and being the petitioner is also suffering from various ailments as appeared from the prescription of Dr. Partha Roy and the prescription of the doctor of Apollo Hospital, he can be granted bail on cer tain conditions so that the investigating authority can interrogate him. When this Court asked whether this Court can pass any order when the ear lier bail prayer has been rejected by one of the coordinate Bench, the learned C ounsel of both the parties submit that when the Hon’ble Bench which rejected the earlier prayer of the petitioner is not available in the Principal Seat, then o ther coordinate Bench can pass order. Considering the facts and circumstances, particularly, when the whole ca se is based on documentary evidences and those documents by this time have been seized as stated by the learned Counsel for the parties, and when the petitione r is required to go to Apollo Hospital again for his treatment, this Court is o f considered opinion that this is a fit case where pre-arrest bail can be grante d. More so, the petitioner is also a Govt. employee and a permanent resident of Rangjuli, Goalpara, Assam. In view of the above, it is directed that in the event of his arrest in connection with aforesaid P.S. case, the petitioner Kandarpa Roy shall be releas ed on bail on his furnishing a bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of like am ount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority on further conditions that he shall appear before the I.O of the case once in a fortnight and he shall not leave the State of Assam without prior permission of the learned CJM, Bongaigao n. However, it is made clear that if the petitioner approaches the learned CJM, Bongaigaon for leaving the station on his medial ground, the same may be co nsidered by the learned CJM with some humanitarian touch. With the aforesaid order, the bail application is disposed of.