Allowed

Atinur Islam and Anr. v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC27 Nov 2019AB/3658/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court granted anticipatory bail to petitioner No. 2, Aminur Islam, accused of rape. The Court found that custodial interrogation was not warranted, citing the victim's delay in filing the FIR and cryptic statements, despite the accused being a close relative.

What did the court decide?

Granted pre-arrest bail of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety of the like amount and directed to appear before IO within 15 days.

Atinur Islam and Anr. Vs the State of Assam — Bail and Remand | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010273752019

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB 3658/2019

¶5

1:ATINUR ISLAM AND ANR. S/O LATE HAIDOR ALI R/O VILL-KISMOTHASHDAHA P.S. AND DIST-DHUBRI ASSAM

¶6

2: AMINUR ISLAM S/O LATE SOBHAN ALI R/O VILL-KISMOTHASHDAHA P.S. AND DIST-DHUBRI ASSAM VERSUS

¶7

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ASSAM

¶8

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M KHAN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶9

BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE RUMI KUMARI PHUKAN

¶10

ORDER

¶11

Date : 27-11-2019

¶12

By this application under Section 438 CrPC, petitioner No. 2, namely, Aminur Islam, has sought for pre-arrest bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Dhubri PS Case No. 696/2016, under Sections 457/376/384/34 IPC. Heard the learned counsel for both the sides.

¶13

Page No.# 2/2

¶14

Also perused the record and the Case Diary along with the statement of the victim.

¶15

It is to be noted that the victim is a married woman having children and she has filed an FIR after around one month of the occurrence that the above present accused petitioners by entering into her house in absence of her husband committed rape upon her.

¶16

In the Case Diary, it reveals that she has also made a cryptic statement under Section 164 CrPC, but she has not mentioned about the circumstances and the reasons for delay in filing the FIR. Rather, it shows that her husband after knowing the matter had assaulted her and ousted her from his house and only thereafter, she has filed an FIR. Serious doubt can be raised against such conduct of a married woman for not reporting the matter promptly, whereas, the accused persons were the close relatives of the victim woman.

¶17

Taking note of all above, it can be held that custodial interrogation of the accused petitioner No. 2, Aminur Islam is not warranted.

¶18

Accordingly, the accused petitioner No. 2, Aminur Islam aforesaid is granted pre-arrest bail. In the event of his arrest in connection with the aforesaid case he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-, with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority with further direction to the petitioner to appear before the IO within a period of 15 days from today and he shall cooperate with the investigation of the case.

¶19

Return the Case Diary.

¶20

Anticipatory Bail Application stands disposed of.

¶21

JUDGE

¶22

Comparing Assistant

Atinur Islam and Anr. v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Atinur Islam 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

Marjina Begum and Anr. Vs State of Assam

Aftar Hussain and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Rabiul Ahmed Vs the State of Assam

MD Dildhar Hussain @ Dilder @Dildar @ Dilwar Hussain Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

MD Alfred Hussain @ Abusarif and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Assam

Hafizur Rahman Vs the State of Assam