Allowed

Mokbul Hussian Khan v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC12 Oct 2020AB/2165/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court disposed of an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 IPC registered under Section 376 IPC. Noting uncorroborated allegations and a prior settlement context, the court held custodial interrogation unnecessary and made the interim bail absolute.

What did the court decide?

The interim pre-arrest bail granted on 01-09-2020 is made absolute. The anticipatory bail application is disposed of.

Mokbul Hussian Khan Vs the State of Assam — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Gauhati HC (2020)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010114992020

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB 2165/2020

¶5

1:MOKBUL HUSSIAN KHAN

¶6

S/O- LATE JAMAL ALI KHAN, VILL- BALIKURI GAON, PO- SONABARI, PSKALGACHIA, DIST- BARPETA, ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY PP ASSAM

¶9

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N UDDIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶10

BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE RUMI KUMARI PHUKAN

¶11

ORDER

¶12

Date : 12-10-2020

¶13

By this application under Section 438 of the IPC, the petitioner, namely, Mokbul Hussen Khan has prayed for pre-arrest bail in connection with Kalgachia Police Station Case No. 739/2020 registered under Section 376 of the IPC.

¶14

Heard the learned counsel appearing for both the parties.

¶15

On the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner to call for the Case Diary of Kalgachia P.S. Case No. 738/2020 on the ground that that an FIR had been lodged against

¶16

Page No.# 2/3

¶17

the husband of the present informant and, accordingly, Kalgachia P.S. Case No. 738/2020 under Section 376 was registered, Case Diary of Kalgachia P.S. Case No. 738/2020 was also called for, which is produced today along with the Case Diary of the present Case.

¶18

Perused both the Case Diaries produced before me.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the present case was filed subsequent to lodging of FIR by the informant in Kalgachia P.S. Case No. 738/2020.

¶20

The Case Diaries reveal that the present petitioner is the Gaonbura of Balikuri Gaon and he had presided over a “Bichar” (legal proceedings), which was held as regards an alleged incident of rape upon the minor daughter of the informant of aforesaid Kalgachia P.S. Case No. 738/2020. The husband of the informant in the present case, namely, Rohim Uddin, was the accused in the aforesaid Bichar. The proceedings ended with a direction to Rohim Uddin to pay a compensation amount of Rs. 1 lakh to the victim, which Rohim Uddin did not comply with. It appears that the FIR in the present case was filed by the informant, i.e., wife of Rohim Uddin, only to resist the execution of the aforesaid proceedings.

¶21

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, after going through the statements of the witnesses who had attended the aforesaid proceedings, has submitted that all the witnesses had unanimously stated that in was held in the Bichar that Rahim Uddin, i.e. husband of the informant in the present case, should pay the compensation amount to the victim of rape.

¶22

It is to be noted that although the informant in the present case (wife of Rohim Uddin) had filed the FIR with the allegation that the present petitioner had committed rape upon her, the issue was never raised in the aforesaid Bichar. Moreover, the allegation made against the present petitioner is not supported by the witnesses so far examined. On the other hand, the statement of the husband of the present informant is not available in the case diary, which might support the allegation of the present informant. In the facts and circumstances of the case, falsity of the allegation made against the present petitioner cannot be ruled out.

¶23

Considering the matter in its entirety, this Court is of the opinion that custodial interrogation of the accused petitioner can be dispensed with.

¶24

Accordingly, the order dated 01.09.2020, passed by this Court granting interim prearrest bail to the petitioner is hereby made absolute.

¶25

Page No.# 3/3

¶26

Anticipatory Bail Application stands disposed of.

¶27

Return the Case Diary.

¶28

JUDGE

¶29

Comparing Assistant

Mokbul Hussian Khan v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mokbul Hussian Khan 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

Barkat Ali Vs the State of Assam

Abdul Barik Ahmed and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Nazma Khatun Vs the State of Assam

Dhrubajyoti Das Vs the State of Assam

Tapan Ch. Boro Vs the State of Assam

Kandarpa Boruah Vs the State of Assam