Allowed

Nazim Uddin @ Nazim Member v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC3 Nov 2021AB/1080/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

, the Gaohati High Court examined a petition for pre-arrest bail filed under Section 438 CrPC. The court observed that while the informant lodged an FIR against the petitioner, the case diary and additional affidavits supported the claim of a valid agreement where part payment was made. Relying on these facts, the court allowed pre-arrest bail.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner allowed pre-arrest bail of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety of like amount.

Nazim Uddin @ Nazim Member Vs the State of Assam — Cheating and Forgery | Gauhati HC (2021)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010066122021

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB/1080/2021

¶5

NAZIM UDDIN @ NAZIM MEMBER S/O LATE MOIN UDDIN, VILL- TARAPUR, P.S.-KATIGORAH, DIST- CACHAR (ASSAM)

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM

¶8

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B U LASKAR

¶9

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶10

:: BEFORE ::

¶11

HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE RUMI KUMARI PHUKAN

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

03.11.2021

¶14

By filing this petition under Section 438 of the CrPC, the petitioner, namely- Nazim Uddin @ Nazim Member has sought for pre-arrest bail in

¶15

Page No.# 2/2

¶16

connection with Katigorah P.S. Case No.81/2021, registered under Section 406/417/506 IPC (corresponding to G.R. Case No.529/2021).

¶17

Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the documents annexed including the case diary.

¶18

The petitioner herein has produced the agreement entered into between the petitioner and the informant (by way of filing additional affidavit) to submit that, in fact, the vehicle in question was given by the informant to him with an agreement to sale the same @ Rs.9 Lacs and as against it, an amount of Rs.5,85,000/- has already been paid and assured that remaining amount will be paid.

¶19

The case diary also supported such contention raised by the petitioner about execution of the agreement between the parties, but the informant suppressing the aforesaid aspect has lodged an FIR in other ways.

¶20

Taking note of all 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 aforesaid case, with further direction to the petitioner to appear before the I/O within 10(ten) days from today for recording his statement and he shall also co-operate with the investigation of the case.

¶21

Return the Case Diary.

¶22

JUDGE

¶23

Comparing Assistant

Nazim Uddin @ Nazim Member v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nazim Uddin @ Nazim Member 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

Bhabadev Mahanta Vs the State of Assam

Lakhi Nath Das @ Samir Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Nekibar Rahman @ Nakul Vs the State of Assam

Pradip Chandra Deka Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Rakesh Kumar Paul Vs the State of Assam and 1 Anr.

Sukhvinder Singh and 7 Ors. Vs the State of Assam