Allowed

Fotik Ali v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC5 Mar 2021AB/385/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge order granted pre-arrest bail to the petitioner under Section 438 CrPC in a case under Sections 366(A) IPC and Section 4 POCSO. The court held it a fit case for bail due to no kidnapping allegation and the victim's denial of sexual intercourse, subjecting the petitioner to standard bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with a surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority.

Fotik Ali Vs the State of Assam — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Gauhati HC (2021)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010021982021

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB/385/2021

¶5

FOTIK ALI

¶6

S/O ABDUL LOTIF @ LOTIB ALI, R/O GHOGA, P.S.-MUKALMUA, DISTNALBARI, ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM

¶9

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S MUNIR

¶10

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶11

B E F O R E

¶12

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HITESH KUMAR SARMA

¶13

05-03-2021

¶14

This is an application, filed under Section 438 of the Cr.PC. seeking pre-arrest bail of the accused-petitioner, namely, Fotik Ali, in connection with Mukalmu Police Station Case No.348/2020 registered under Sections 366(A) of the Indian Penal Code, read with Section 4 POCSO Act.

¶15

Heard Mr. S. Munir, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. S.H. Borah, learned

¶16

Page No.# 2/2

¶17

Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam appearing for the Respondent State.

¶18

Case diary produced has been perused, including the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It appears from the statements of the victim recorded as aforesaid that she went with the accused petitioner on her own to Mumbai and stayed there together for about 4(four) months and, thereafter, came back after facing financial difficulties there at Mumbai. She has categorically sated that no sexual intercourse has taken place between them.

¶19

In the absence of any specific allegation in respect of her kidnapping by the accused petitioner and also in the absence of any allegation of sexual intercourse by the victim herself, this is a fit case for granting the privilege of pre-arrest bail.

¶20

Accordingly, it is provided that in the event of arrest of the petitioner above named, in connection with the case aforementioned, he shall be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-, with a suitable surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of arresting authority.

¶21

The direction for pre-arrest bail is subject to the conditions that the petitioner :

¶22

(a) shall appear before the Investigating Officer of concerned Police Station, within seven days from today and shall co-operate with the investigation;

¶23

(b) shall not hamper with the investigation, or tamper with the evidence of the case;

¶24

(c) shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

¶25

The bail application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶26

Return the case diary.

¶27

JUDGE

¶28

Comparing Assistant

Fotik Ali v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Fotik Ali 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

Jetuki Boro Vs the State of Assam

Krishna Chetry Vs the State of Assam

Kamal Paul Vs the State of Assam

Subrata Das @ Kanai Vs the State of Assam

Madhu Chandra Das Vs the State of Assam

Bijit Chutia Vs the State of Assam