The Gauhati High Court dismissed an application for pre-arrest bail under Section 438 CrPC filed by the petitioner family. The court found that statements recorded from the victim prior to her death indicated the case was not a fit circumstance for grant of bail.
Application for pre-arrest bail under Section 438 CrPC dismissed.
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
GAHC010264732019
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB 3830/2019
1:MOMINUR RAHMAN AND 3 ORS.
S/O BACCHU SHEIKH, R/O VILL-SAGALCHARA PART-III, P.S. AND DISTDIST-DHUBRI
2: MONA BIBI W/O BACCHU SHEIKH R/O VILL-SAGALCHARA PART-III P.S. AND DIST-DIST-DHUBRI
VERSUS
1:THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A T SARKAR
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY
Page No.# 2/2
ORDER
Date : 26-11-2019
Heard Mr. A.T. Sarkar, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
By this application under Section 438, CrPC, the petitioners namely, 1) Mominur Rahman, 2) Mona Bibi, 3) Hafizur Rahman @ Sopiqul Hoque and 4) Mofizur Rahman @ Mofizul Hoque have prayed for pre-arrest bail, apprehending their arrests, in connection with Dhubri Police Station Case No. 1195/2019 registered under Section 498(A)/307/326/34, I.P.C. with the addition of 304(B), I.P.C. later on
Perused the contents of the FIR lodged on 07.07.2017 by the informant who is the father of the victim. At the time of lodging the FIR, the victim was alive and she was admitted at Dhubri Civil Hospital. Subsequently, the victim has expired due to burn injuries. Subsequent to the death of the victim, Section 304(B) was added. The petitioners are husband, mother-in-law and two brothers-in-law of the said victim. Mr. Sarkar, referring to an affidavit sworn by the informant, has submitted that the FIR was lodged due to some misunderstanding.
Upon perusal of the statements of the victim recorded prior to the death, which is available in the case diary, I do not find this to be a fit case to grant the petitioners the privilege of pre-arrest bail. Accordingly, the bail application stands dismissed.
The case diary is to be returned.
Comparing Assistant
2 issues framed by the court
Whether pre-arrest bail should be granted to the petitioners in a case involving Sections 498-A, 307, 326, 34 IPC and subsequent addition of Section 304-B IPC.
Whether the presence of the victim in the case diary prior to death makes it a fit case for pre-arrest bail.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Mominur Rahman
Mona Bibi
Hafizur Rahman
Mofizur Rahman
State of Assam
Manish Choudhury
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
