Allowed

Abul Hussain @ Abul Ali and Anr. v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC17 Jan 2019AB/116/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court granted pre-arrest bail to the accused-petitioners under Section 438 Cr.PC. The single-judge bench granted bail based on a settlement between parties and the absence of alleged grievous injury, deeming custodial interrogation unnecessary. Bail bond conditions were specified.

What did the court decide?

Pre-arrest bail granted subject to furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- and compliance with conditions regarding jurisdiction, investigation, and tampering with evidence.

Abul Hussain @ Abul Ali and Anr. Vs the State of Assam — Anticipatory Bail | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010002172019

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB 116/2019

¶5

1:ABUL HUSSAIN @ ABUL ALI AND ANR. S/O. ARMAN ALI, R/O. PANJABARI, BAGHORBARI, P.S. SATGAON, DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM-781037.

¶6

2: MANJUR ALI S/O. ARMAN ALI R/O. PANJABARI BAGHORBARI P.S. SATGAON DIST. KAMRUP (M) ASSAM-781037

¶7

VERSUS 1:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY PP, ASSAM.

¶8

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S MUNIR

¶9

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶10

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HITESH KUMAR SARMA

¶11

ORDER

¶12

Date : 17-01-2019

¶13

Heard Mr. S Munir, learned counsel for the accused-petitioners as well as Mr. TK Mishra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the State respondent. Also heard Mr. BK Das,

¶14

Page No.# 2/2

¶15

learned counsel appearing for the victim.

¶16

This is an application, filed under Section 438 of the Cr.PC. seeking pre-arrest bail of the accused-petitioners, namely, 1. Abul Hussain @ Abul Ali and 2. Manjur Ali, in connection with Satgaon PS Case No. 317/2017 registered under Sections 143/458/326/307 of the IPC read with Sections 4/5 of the Assam Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act.

¶17

Perused the petition as well as the annexures furnished therewith.

¶18

On hearing the respective learned counsel for the parties, this court is of the view that in view of the settlement between the parties and the fact that no grievous injury is alleged by the victim himself, custodial interrogation of the accused-petitioners is not considered necessary. That being so, they are granted the privilege of pre-arrest bail.

¶19

The accused-petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Police Officer within a period of 7 (seven) days from today, and, in the event of their arrest, they shall be released on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with one suitable surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority, on the following conditions:-

¶20

The petitioners shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the aforesaid police station, without prior written permission from its officer-in-charge,

¶21

The petitioners shall not hamper with the investigation, or tamper with the evidence of the case, and

¶22

The petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

¶23

The petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶24

JUDGE

¶25

Comparing Assistant

Abul Hussain @ Abul Ali and Anr. v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abul Hussain @ Abul Ali and Anr. v. the State of Assam

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

Khairul Islam Vs the State of Assam

Shamim Ahmed Vs the State of Assam

Husney Alom Vs the State of Assam

Sonu Kumar Vs the State of Assam

Sadek Ali Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Rohit Das @ Biplab Das Vs the State of Assam