Dismissed

Md. Jaherul Islam @ Jeherul Islam v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC23 Oct 2019Crl.Pet./1165/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal petition under Section 482 CrPC, the Gauhati High Court examined whether invoking Section 319 CrPC to take cognizance against the petitioner was legally flawed. Rejecting the challenge, the court quashed the petition, holding that evidence on record sufficiently implicated the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed with direction to petitioner to appear before the trial court within 15 days.

Md. Jaherul Islam @ Jeherul Islam Vs the State of Assam — Narcotics (NDPS) | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010239852019

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : Crl.Pet. 1165/2019

¶5

1:MD. JAHERUL ISLAM @ JEHERUL ISLAM

¶6

S/O LATE ABDUL GONI, R/O 2 NO. LOHARKATHA, P.S.-MUKALMUA, DISTNALBARI, ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

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

¶9

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S MUNIR

¶10

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶11

BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE RUMI KUMARI PHUKAN

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

23-10-2019.

¶14

Heard Mr. S. Munir, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. B.B. Gogoi, learned Addl. P.P., Assam for the State respondent.

¶15

By filing this petition under Section 482 CrPC, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 28.06.2019, passed by the learned Special Judge, Nalbari in Special (N) Case No.6/2017, under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of the NDPS Act, whereby the trial Court has taken cognizance against the accused/petitioner under the said section of law, impleading him as an accused by invoking the power provided under Section 319 of the CrPC.

¶16

Page No.# 2/3

¶17

Now it has been contended that although the name of the present accused/petitioner was mentioned by the accused apprehended at the spot but at the time of filing of the charge sheet, the I.O. has sought for discharge of the accused, for which he is not facing the trial and only the other accused who has been apprehended, stood the trial.

¶18

However after examination of six witnesses, the learned trial Court took cognizance of the offence against the accused/petitioner also by invoking the power provided under Section 319 of the CrPC, which is stated to be bad in law and has prayed for quashing of the aforesaid order passed by the learned trial Court.

¶19

I have gone through the documents annexed and found that in the FIR itself, there is averment that the other accused Ainul Ali carried drugs (Ganja) of commercial quantity in his auto-van, as loaded by the present petitioner. The same statement is again reiterated by the informant while giving evidence and there are other evidence on record about such recovery of drugs (Ganja) from the vehicle driven by the other accused.

¶20

The learned trial Court has invoked the provision of Section 319 of the CrPC, after recording statement of several witnesses including the I.O. The evidence of other witnesses also suggestive of involvement of the present accused person and in view of such materials on record, there is no illegality in the order so passed by the learned trial Court, while invoking the provision under Section 319 of the CrPC, although the I.O. has submitted that he could not collect any evidence against the present accused person.

¶21

The scope of Section 319 of the CrPC is wide enough where under the Court can take cognizance against any person who may not be charge sheeted nor named in the FIR also. But in the instant case, the name of the present accused/petitioner was already mentioned in the FIR itself and now in the course of trial, the evidence emerged against him. There being no error in the impugned order passed by the learned trial Court, there appears no ground to interfere with the order passed by the learned trial Court by invoking the power provided under Section 482 of the CrPC.

¶22

Accordingly this petition is disposed of with direction to the petitioner to appear before the learned trial Court within 15 days from today or the date so fixed, by the trial Court.

¶23

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the accused should be allowed to go on bail by the Court, as there is no scope of hampering with the trial of the case, as the same is on the verge of completion.

¶24

The petitioner will move a proper bail application before the trial Court on his appearance and the

¶25

Page No.# 3/3

¶26

learned trial Court will consider and dispose of the same in accordance with the law.

¶27

The petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶28

JUDGE

¶29

Comparing Assistant

Md. Jaherul Islam @ Jeherul Islam v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Jaherul Islam @ Jeherul Islam 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

Munish Motilal Pariyani Vs Ritisha Munish Bariyani @ Inky Gurbani

Paresh Dutta Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Ujjal Konwar Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Md. Isha Haque Ali and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Badruddin Ajmal Vs Rokibul Hussain

Bijumoni Nath Vs Gauri Shankar Saikia and Anr.