Allowed

MD Hamid Ali v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC3 Dec 2019AB/4318/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court granted pre-arrest bail of Rs. 20,000 to the petitioner fearing arrest under Section 395 IPC in a Hatigaon case. The court found no sufficient incriminating material requiring custodial interrogation. Bail was granted subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Grants pre-arrest bail of Rs. 20,000 with one surety providing commands to appear within one week and not tamper with evidence or investigation.

MD Hamid Ali Vs the State of Assam — Anticipatory Bail | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010296002019

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB 4318/2019

¶5

1:MD HAMID ALI

¶6

S/O ZAMAR UDDIN, R/O VILL-KUBARSUBA, P.S.-DHULA, DIST-DARRANG, ASSAM, PIN-784115

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM

¶9

REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A BAREK

¶11

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶12

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BORTHAKUR

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Date : 03-12-2019

¶15

Heard Mr. B. Chowdhury, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. K. Konwar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam appearing for the State respondent.

¶16

By this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. the petitioner namely, Md. Hamid Ali has prayed for granting pre-arrest bail apprehending arrest in connection with Hatigaon P.S. Case No. 640/2018 (corresponding to GR Case No. 12390/2018) under Section 395 of the IPC.

¶17

The case diary, as called for, is placed before the Court.

¶18

Scrutiny of the case diary reveals that there is no sufficient incriminating material requiring the petitioner’s custodial interrogation in connection with the above noted case, subject of course,

¶19

Page No.# 2/2

¶20

to further investigation. It is revealed that the case of the present petitioner is based on mere suspicion. The co-accused person is already released on bail. Therefore, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the petitioner, namely, Md. Hamid Ali shall be released on pre-arrest bail of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority.

¶21

The above pre-arrest bail order, however, shall be subject to the following conditions-

¶22

i) That the petitioner/accused shall appear before the arresting authority within 1 (one) week.

¶23

ii) That the petitioner/accused shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat of promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Police Officer or the Court; and

¶24

iii) That the petitioner/accused shall not hamper or temper in the investigation.

¶25

Return the case diary.

¶26

JUDGE

¶27

Comparing Assistant

MD Hamid Ali v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

MD Hamid Ali 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

Aijul Hoque @ Ajijul Hoque Vs the State of Assam

Jue Chutia Vs the State of Assam

Jiten Payeng Vs the State of Assam

Bharat Gohain Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Shahabul Hoque Vs the State of Assam

Golok Phukan and Anr. Vs Barasha Baruah Phukan and Anr.