The Gauhati High Court dismissed a second application for pre-arrest bail under Section 438 Cr.PC, holding that no new grounds were urged by petitioners facing charges under Sections 366(A) and 34 IPC and the case diary remained unchanged after prior rejection.
Prayer for pre-arrest bail stands rejected; the petition is disposed of.
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
GAHC010009092021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/181/2021
JAHANGIR ALOM AND ANR.
S/O. LT. LIHAJ UDDIN, VILL. NAGARJHAR, P.S. HOWLY, DIST. BARPETA, ASSAM.
2: RABIUL UDDIN @ RABIUL ALOM S/O. LT. RIAZ UDDIN VILL. NAGARJHAR P.S. HOWLY DIST. BARPETA ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY PP, ASSAM.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B CHOWDHURY
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HITESH KUMAR SARMA
ORDER
Date : 12-03-2021
Heard Mr. B Chowdhury, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. RJ Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the State of Assam.
Page No.# 2/2
This is a 2nd application, filed under Section 438 of the Cr.PC. seeking pre-arrest bail of the petitioners, namely, 1. Jahangir Alom and 2. Rabiul Uddin @ Rabiul Alom , in connection with Howly Police Station Case No. 217/2020 registered under Sections 366(A)/34 of the IPC.
Perused the case diary produced before this Court.
The earlier application for pre-arrest bail of the petitioners was rejected by this Court, vide order, dated 17.12.2020, passed in AB No. 3468/2020, after perusal of the case diary, including the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.PC.
There is no new ground urged by the petitioners while pressing this application today. In the absence of any new ground and the materials in the case diary remaining the same, this Court is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioners. Therefore, the prayer for pre-arrest bail stands rejected.
Return the case diary.
The petition stands disposed of accordingly.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether pre-arrest bail under Section 438 Cr.PC shall be granted in the absence of new grounds despite earlier rejection.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Order dated 17.12.2020 passed in AB No. 3468/2020Referred
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Jahangir Alom and Rabiul Uddin @ Rabiul Alom
The State of Assam Rep. by PP, Assam
Hitesh Kumar Sarma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
