Allowed

Shahabul Hoque v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC3 Dec 2019Crl.Rev.P./116/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court disposed of a revision petition challenging a conviction under Section 417 IPC. Relying on a deed of mutual agreement showing an amicable settlement between the petitioner and the private informant, the Court acquitted the petitioner, set him at liberty, and set aside the impugned orders, correcting the defence counsel's reference regarding compoundability.

What did the court decide?

Revision petition allowed; impugned judgment and orders of conviction set aside; petitioner acquitted and set at liberty.

Shahabul Hoque Vs the State of Assam — Cheque Dishonour | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010004762010

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : Crl.Rev.P. 116/2010

¶5

1:SHAHABUL HOQUE

¶6

S/O YUNUS ALI, VILL- SUBHASH NAGAR, P.S. DHUBRI, DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM

¶9

2:Jahanara Khatun W/O Shahabul Hoque D/O Shukumuddin R/O Vill Airanjongla Subhashnagar PS and Dist Dhubri Assa

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.S ALIM

¶11

Advocate for the Respondent :

¶12

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BORTHAKUR

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Date : 03-12-2019

¶15

Heard Mr. A.K. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. A.A.R. Karim, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2. Also heard Mr. H. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam appearing for the State/respondent No. 1.

¶16

Page No.# 2/2

¶17

By this petition under Section 401/397 Cr.P.C., read with Section 482, the petitioner has challenged the legality and correctness of the Judgment and Order, dated 08.01.2010, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Dhubri in C.A. No. 1(1)/2009 whereby the appeal of the petitioner was dismissed and thereby affirmed the Judgment and Order dated 08.12.2008 of conviction and sentence of simple imprisonment for 6 (six) months and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand) only in default to further undergo simple imprisonment for 2 (two) months under Section 417 of the IPC passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhubri in Case No. G.R. (DBB) 260/04.

¶18

By an additional affidavit filed by the private respondent No. 2/the informant, it is stated that the dispute between her and the petitioner has been amicably settled outside the Court and to that effect, having executed a deed of mutual agreement on 16.09.2019, she has no objection if the petition is disposed off on compromise by setting aside the impugned Judgment and Orders of conviction passed against the petitioner.

¶19

Mr. A.K. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the offence under Section 417 of IPC is a compoundable offence under Section 320 Cr.P.C.

¶20

Perusal of the deed of mutual agreement shows that it was executed between the informant/victim woman and the petitioner and the matter is amicably settled between them. On consideration of the above fact of amicable settlement arrived at between the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that the dispute between the parties has already been resolved outside the Court. Accordingly, the instant revision petition is closed, setting aside the impugned Judgment and Order, dated 08.01.2010.

¶21

Accordingly, the petitioner is acquitted of the offence under Section 417 of the IPC and set at liberty on compromise.

¶22

Return the L.C.R.

¶23

JUDGE

¶24

Comparing Assistant

Shahabul Hoque v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahabul Hoque 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.

MD Hamid Ali Vs the State of Assam

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