Single bench order allowing pre-arrest bail to the petitioner in a DPR offence. It relies on the victim's admission of false implication and suppression of facts, recording a fresh statement.
Allowed bail of Rupees ten thousand with one surety of like amount and liberty to appear before the Investigating Officer within fifteen days.
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
GAHC010057972021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/1000/2021
HABIZUR RAHMAN @ HAFIZUR RAHMAN S/O MOZIBAR RAHMAN, R/O BOUSHKATA PART-IV, P.S.-SOUTH SALMARA, DIST-SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR B CHANDA
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE RUMI KUMARI PHUKAN
O R D E R
10.12.2021.
By filing this second pre-arrest bail petition under Section 438 of the CrPC, the petitioner namely Habizur Rahman @ Hafizur Rahman has sought for pre-arrest bail in connection with the Fakirganj P.S. Case No.62/2020, under Sections 363/365/34 of the IPC.
Heard learned counsel for both sides and perused the record and the case diary.
Page No.# 2/2
After rejection of the earlier bail on 22.02.2021, vide A.B. No.96/2021, the present petitioner come forward with the present petition with the fact that the victim has in-fact suppressed the fact on earlier occasion.
From the record of the statement of the victim girl, on the mobile phone, recorded by one Amir Mollah (accused No.2 in the FIR), reveals that she indulged with an affair with one Moinul and had given a false statement during the course of investigation.
The voice record of the victim was forwarded to the I.O. with a direction to record her statement afresh. Accordingly her statement was recorded by the I.O., wherein she has categorically stated that her father has falsely implicated the present accused/petitioner along with accused Amir Mollah, whereas she herself went with one Monowar and married with him, at her own will. Now from the changed version of the victim herself, it reveals that there is no authenticity either in the FIR or in her changed version in entirety.
Considering all the above, the accused/petitioner named above, the petitioner named above is allowed to go on pre-arrest bail of Rs.10,000/-, with one surety of like amount, in the event of his arrest by the arresting officer in connection with the Fakirganj P.S. Case No.62/2020, with further direction to the petitioner to appear before the I.O., within fifteen days from today, to record his statement.
The bail petition stands allowed.
Return back the case diary forthwith.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether pre-arrest bail should be granted in the light of the victim's contradictory statements and false implication of the petitioner.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Habizur Rahman @ Hafizur Rahman
The State of Assam
Rumi Kumari Phukan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
