Allowed

Tazal Ali and 5 Ors. v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC11 Mar 2019AB/291/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This pre-arrest bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. was allowed for six petitioners connected to a matrimonial dispute case. The court noted the victim's statement indicated voluntary elopement, negating implicating the petitioners, and granted bail with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners are granted pre-arrest bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000/- each with suitable sureties; Petitioner No. 6's interim bail is made absolute.

Tazal Ali and 5 Ors. Vs the State of Assam — Bail and Remand | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010023872019

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB 291/2019

¶5

1:TAZAL ALI AND 5 ORS. S/O HURMUJ ALI VILL- FOLIMARI P.S. LAKHIMPUR DIST. GOALPARA, ASSAM, PIN - 78129

¶6

2: HURMUJ ALI S/O LATE NOBAB ALI SHEIKH VILL- FOLIMARI P.S. LAKHIMPUR DIST. GOALPARA ASSAM

¶7

PIN - 78129

¶8

3: REJJAK ALI S/O HURMUJ ALI VILL- FOLIMARI P.S. LAKHIMPUR DIST. GOALPARA ASSAM

¶9

PIN - 78129

¶10

4: SANJAB ALI S/O HURMUJ ALI VILL- FOLIMARI P.S. LAKHIMPUR DIST. GOALPARA ASSAM

¶11

Page No.# 2/3

¶12

PIN - 78129

¶13

5: ABDUL MANNAN ALI @ MUNNAF ALI S/O HURMUJ ALI VILL- FOLIMARI P.S. LAKHIMPUR DIST. GOALPARA ASSAM PIN - 78129

¶14

6: ADURI KHATUN W/O HURMUJ ALI VILL- FOLIMARI P.S. LAKHIMPUR DIST. GOALPARA ASSAM PIN - 7812 VERSUS 1:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶15

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR Z HUSSAIN

¶16

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶17

BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HITESH KUMAR SARMA

¶18

:: O R D E R ::

¶19

11-03-2019

¶20

This is an application made under Section 438 Cr.P.C ., seeking pre-arrest bail by the petitioners, namely, 1. Tazal Ali, 2. Hurmuj Ali, 3. Rejjak Ali, 4. Sanjab Ali, 5. Abdul Mannan Ali @ Munnaf Ali and 6. Ms. Aduri Khatun, apprehending arrest in connection with Hajo Police Station Case No. 44/2019 , registered under Sections 143/368 of the IPC .

¶21

I have perused the petition including the copy of the FIR and the documents annexed therewith.

¶22

Page No.# 3/3

¶23

The case diary received, has been perused including the statement of the victim, recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C.

¶24

Heard Mr. M Hoque, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Ms. SH Bora, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the State of Assam.

¶25

In her statement, the victim has not implicated the petitioners with the commission of the alleged offences; rather, her statement is that she eloped on her own.

¶26

That being so, the prayer for pre-arrest bail of the petitioners is granted.

¶27

The petitioner No. 6 has been availing interim pre-arrest bail. She has appeared before the Investigating Police Officer in accordance with the order granting interim pre-arrest bail to her. Her statement has already been recorded and she has not misused the liberty granted to her.

¶28

Accordingly, the interim pre-arrest bail granted to the petitioner No. 6, vide order dated 0602-2019, is made absolute by this order with the same terms and conditions.

¶29

So far as the other petitioners are concerned, on perusal of the materials in the case diary, this Court is of the view that this is not a case where custodial interrogation of the petitioners is essential. Therefore, the petitioners are granted the privilege of pre-arrest bail.

¶30

Accordingly, it is provided that in the event of arrest of the petitioner Nos. 1 to 5 above named, in connection with the case aforementioned, they shall be released on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- each , with a suitable surety each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of arresting authority.

¶31

The direction for pre-arrest bail is subject to the conditions that the petitioner Nos. 1 to 5: (a) shall appear before the Investigating of concerned Police Station, within seven days from today and shall co-operate with the investigation;

¶32

(b) shall not hamper with the investigation, or tamper with the evidence of the case;

¶33

(c) 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. The anticipatory bail application stands disposed of accordingly. Return the case diary.

¶34

JUDGE

¶35

Comparing Assistant

Tazal Ali and 5 Ors. v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tazal Ali and 5 Ors. 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

Baharul Islam @ Bahadur Islam Vs Ranu Das and 3 Ors.

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smti Sarumai Das and 4 Ors.

Mustt. Halima Begum and 4 Ors, Vs Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd. and Anr.

Naresh Prasad Vs the State of Assam

Sailen Das Vs the State of Assam

Harmohan Das Vs the State of Assam