Partly allowed

Dilip Arjya and 4 Ors. v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC8 Oct 2020AB/2363/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge of the Gauhati Court disposed of a bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC filed by five petitioners in a POCSO/IPC rape case, granting pre-arrest bail to four but rejecting it for the accused allegedly implicated in the rape of a minor.

What did the court decide?

Pre-arrest bail granted to petitioners Nos. 2 to 5; prayer of petitioner No. 1 rejected; case disposed of.

Dilip Arjya and 4 Ors. Vs the State of Assam — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Gauhati HC (2020)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010122022020

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB 2363/2020

¶5

1:DILIP ARJYA AND 4 ORS.

¶6

S/O LT. RAM ARJYA, R/O VILL. DARKINAMARI, P.S. ABHAYAPURI, DIST. BONGAIGAON, PIN-783384

¶7

2: RUPAM ARJYA S/O BHARAT ARJYA R/O VILL. DARKINAMARI P.S. ABHAYAPURI DIST. BONGAIGAON PIN-783384

¶8

3: SANDHYA ARJYA W/O LT. RAM ARJYA R/O VILL. DARKINAMARI P.S. ABHAYAPURI DIST. BONGAIGAON PIN-783384

¶9

4: DAYAL ARJYA S/O DULAL ARJYA R/O VILL. DARKINAMARI P.S. ABHAYAPURI DIST. BONGAIGAON PIN-783384

¶10

5: NIREN ARJYA S/O LT. NITAI ARJYA R/O VILL. DARKINAMARI P.S. ABHAYAPURI DIST. BONGAIGAON PIN-78338

¶11

Page No.# 2/3

¶12

VERSUS

¶13

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶14

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A ROSHID

¶15

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶16

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HITESH KUMAR SARMA

¶17

ORDER

¶18

Date : 08-10-2020

¶19

The Court proceedings have been conducted through Video-Conference.

¶20

This is an application, filed under Section 438 of the Cr.PC. seeking pre-arrest bail of the petitioners, namely, 1. Dilip Arjya, 2. Rupam Arjya, 3. Sandhya Arjya, 4. Dayal Arjya and 5. Niren Arjya, in connection with Abhayapuri PS Case No. 335/2020 registered under Sections 366/343/376/506/34 of the IPC read with Section 4 of the POCSO Act (NGR Case No. 1237/2020)

¶21

Heard Mr. A Roshid, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. RJ Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the State of Assam.

¶22

Perused the case diary produced before this court, including the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.PC.

¶23

On perusal of the said statement of the victim, it clearly transpires that the petitioner No. 1, Dilip Arjya has been thoroughly implicated with the commission of rape on the person of the victim. The victim, as per materials collected by the Investigating Police Officer, is below 18 years of age as her date of birth is 20.11.2005. So far the petitioner Nos. 2 to 5 are concerned, there is no such material in the case diary against them requiring their custodial interrogation. Therefore, the petitioner Nos. 2 to 5 are granted the privilege of pre-arrest bail.

¶24

Accordingly, the interim pre-arrest bail granted to the petitioner Nos. 2 to 5, namely,

¶25

Page No.# 3/3

¶26

Rupam Arjya, Sandhya Arjya, Dayal Arjya and Niren Arjya vide order, dated 22.09.2020 is made absolute on the same terms and conditions.

¶27

So far the petitioner No. 1, Dilip Arjya is concerned, in view of the materials recorded above, his prayer for pre-arrest bail stands rejected.

¶28

This petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶29

Return the case diary.

¶30

JUDGE

¶31

Comparing Assistant

Dilip Arjya and 4 Ors. v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dilip Arjya and 4 Ors. 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

Intaj Ali Vs the State of Assam

Halima Begum and 6 Ors. Vs the State of Assam

Badsha Ali @ Badsha Sk. Vs the State of Assam

Rahul Ali and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Assam

Shirajul Hoque @ Sirajul Ali Vs the State of Assam

Smti. Mamoni Saikia Dutta Vs Prasanta Thakuria and Anr.