The Gauhati High Court dismissed an application for pre-arrest bail under Section 438 CrPC. Rejection was based on specific implication by the victim regarding the offence under Section 354 IPC and the nature of the accusation.
Application for pre-arrest bail under Section 438 CrPC rejected and dismissed; interim order of 06.09.2019 vacated.
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
GAHC010215782019
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB 2989/2019
1:RABIUL AHMED
S/O ALIMUDDIN SHEIKH @ KHOKA SHEIKH, VILL-BHELA KHAMAR, GORGORIBORI, P.O. AND P.S.-KRISHNAI, DIST-GOALPARA, PIN-783129
VERSUS
1:THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A ROSHID
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE RUMI KUMARI PHUKAN
ORDER
Date : 26-11-2019
Heard Mr. A. Roshid, learned counsel for the accused-petitioner and Mr. N Kalita, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam, appearing for the State respondent .
This is an application, under Section 438 CrPC, seeking pre-arrest bail of the accusedpetitioner, namely, Rabiul Ahmed, in connection with Krishnai PS Case No. 180/2019 registered under Section 420/342/354 IPC.
Considered the submission of learned counsel for both sides.
Today, case diary has been produced and the same is gone through.
So far as the material against the accused-petitioner in the case diary is concerned, the victim
Page No.# 2/2
woman has specifically implicated the present accused-petitioner with the commission of offence under Section 354 IPC.
Considering the nature of accusation and the complicity of the accused-petitioner with the offence alleged, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to grant the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the accused-petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for pre-arrest bail is rejected.
Consequently, the application stands dismissed.
Interim order dated 06.09.2019 passed by this Court stands vacated.
Return the case diary.
JUDGE
Milansinha/
Comparing Assistant
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to grant pre-arrest bail under Section 438 CrPC to an accused implicated in offences under Sections 420, 342, and 354 IPC.
Whether the material in the case diary warrants denial of pre-arrest bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Rabiul Ahmed
The State of Assam
Rumi Phukan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
