The Gauhati High Court rejected an application for pre-arrest bail filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a rape case, holding that the case was not fit for bail, and vacated an earlier interim bail.
Pre-arrest bail application rejected; interim pre-arrest bail of 17.08.2020 vacated; case diary returned.
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
GAHC010106192020
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB 1953/2020
1:SABEL UDDIN
S/O. LT. SHUKUR ALI, R/O. VILL. KANAHARA, P.S. CHHAYGAON, DIST. KAMRUP, ASSAM.
VERSUS
1:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY PP, ASSAM.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P K DAS
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HITESH KUMAR SARMA
ORDER
Date : 06-10-2020
The Court proceedings have been conducted through Video-Conference.
Heard Mr. D Bora, learned counsel appearing for the accused-petitioner as well as Mr. B Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the State of Assam.
This is an application, filed under Section 438 of the Cr.PC. seeking pre-arrest bail of the accused-petitioner, namely, Sabel Uddin, in connection with Boko PS Case No. 620/2020 registered under Sections 406/354(A)/376/506 of the IPC.
I have perused the case diary produced before this court by the learned Additional
Page No.# 2/2
Public Prosecutor, including the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.PC.
It appears from such statement of the victim that she has implicated the accusedpetitioner with the offence of commission of rape on her person. She has also narrated in her such statement the manner in which the offence was committed. The statement of another witness lends support to the statement made by the victim.
That being so, in the considered view of this Court, this is not a fit case to grant the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the accused-petitioner. Therefore, his prayer for pre-arrest bail stands rejected.
The interim pre-arrest bail granted to the accused-petitioner on 17.08.2020 hereby stands vacated.
Return the case diary.
The petition stands disposed of accordingly.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
2 issues framed by the court
Whether pre-arrest bail should be granted to the accused in a rape case where the victim's statement is supported by another witness.
Whether an interim pre-arrest bail order needs to be vacated before disposing of a bail application.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Sabel Uddin
State of Assam
Hitesh Kumar Sarma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
