Disposed

Sajad Ali v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Gauhati HC21 Mar 2018Crl.Pet./234/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought quashing of NBAW issued for non-appearance in Section 498A case. Court observed no irregularity in order but stayed warrants pending appearance. Directed petitioner to appear within 15 days to file fresh bail petition for regular consideration.

What did the court decide?

Stayed the NBAW; directed petitioner to appear before the trial court within 15 days with a fresh bail petition.

Sajad Ali Vs the State of Assam and Anr. — Matrimonial and Divorce | Gauhati HC (2018)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010030792018

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : Crl.Pet. 234/2018

¶5

SAJAD ALI S/O MOHAMMED ALI R/O NIRZAPUR, NAMATI NIRZAPUR NAMATI, NOONMATI, DIST. KAMRUP (M)

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶8

2:SAYEDA SAJINA BEGUM D/O SAIYAD TAJIJ ALI R/O BHELLA (BONKARIA) P.S. BARPETA

¶9

DIST. BARPETA PIN - 781309

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D DEY

¶11

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶12

BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE RUMI KUMARI PHUKAN

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Date : 21-03-2018

¶15

Petitioner sought quashing of the order of the learned SDJM(S), Barpeta dated 26.12.2017 in GR case 3864/2012 u/s 498(A) of the IPC whereby NBAW is issued against him.

¶16

Page No.# 2/2

¶17

(2) Heard Mr D Dey, learned counsel for petitioner and Mr BJ Dutta, learned additional public prosecutor for the State.

¶18

(3) Learned counsel appearing for petitioner submits that in fact after his release on bail, petitioner was not served with any process and in the meantime he was also transferred to some other place and so he could not appear before the trial court and in the meanwhile the court also issued NBAW against him.

¶19

(4) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶20

(5) Record reveals that petitioner was served summon on 24.12.2014 and even then he did not appear and the trial court was compelled to issue NBAW against him. There appears to be no irregularity in the order of the learned trial court. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner is still ready to face trial regularly but apprehensive of arrest.

¶21

(6) The offence alleged in FIR, which was filed by the wife against husband, is one under Section 498(A) of the IPC, and the husband(petitioner) is ready to face trial regularly.

¶22

(7) Considering entire matter and the undertaking to face trial regularly the petition is disposed with direction to petitioner to appear before the trial court within 15 days with necessary bail petition and the learned court will consider and dispose the same in accordance with law. Till his appearance, NBAW is stayed.

¶23

JUDGE

¶24

Na/

¶25

Comparing Assistant

Sajad Ali v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sajad Ali v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Md. Majibur Rahman Vs the State of Assam

Jobbar Ali Vs the State of Assam

Jayanti Sharma and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam

Raja Chamuah Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Md. Salimuddin Ahmed Vs Manoj Kumar Kedia

Mrs. Nirupama Saikia Vs Mrs. Rehana Begum