The Gauhati High Court rejected an application for anticipatory bail in a Section 376 IPC case. The court held that an out-of-court settlement cannot override the implication of the petitioner in the victim's statutory statement recorded under Section 164 CrPC.
Application for anticipatory bail rejected; case diary returned.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010200462018
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB 2804/2018
1:MOKBUL HUSSAIN @ MOKBUL ALI S/O- GAMATULLAH SK, R/O- VILL- CHOTOBASHJANI, P.S. AND DISTDHUBRI, ASSAM
VERSUS
1:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY P.P., ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M KHAN
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HITESH KUMAR SARMA
ORDER
Date : 01-10-2018
This anticipatory bail application, under Section 438 Cr.PC, has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Mokbul Hussain @ Mokbul Ali, in connection with Dbubri PS Case No. 585/2017, under Sections 448/376/506 IPC.
Heard Mr. M. Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. P.S. Lahkar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the state respondent. Mr. K.K. Patgiri, learned counsel, appearing for the informant.
Case diary produced has been perused.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that although the offence alleged is under Section 376 IPC, yet the matter has been settled between the victim and the petitioner out of court, and to that effect, they have entered into an agreement. But, the fact remains that the case is, inter-alia, registered under Section 376 IPC, and, in the statement of the victim, recorded under Section 164 Cr.PC, she has implicated the present petitioner.
Page No.# 2/2
The present petitioner has been implicated by the victim in her statement under section 164 Cr.PC, which cannot be done away with by an agreement. Therefore, the ground taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner and agreed to by learned counsel for the informant/victim that the matter has been settled out of court, in the considered view of this court, cannot be a ground for bail of the petitioner in the instant case, and accordingly, his prayer is rejected.
The petition stands disposed of accordingly. Return the case diary.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a pre-cognizable information statement implicating the petitioner precludes entertainable anticipatory bail despite an out-of-court settlement.
Whether the court should allow the anticipatory bail application filed under the CrPC.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Mokbul Hussain @ Mokbul Ali
The State of Assam
Hitesh Kumar Sarma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
