Allowed

Ajibul Hoque v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC1 Nov 2021Bail Appln./2631/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was granted on the ground that the charge-sheet was not filed within the statutory period of 90 days. The High Court held that since investigation was incomplete beyond the time limit, the petitioner was entitled to default bail and was granted release.

What did the court decide?

The accused-petitioner is released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000 with two suitable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of learned jurisdictional Special Judge under the POCS

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

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010143092021

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : Bail Appln./2631/2021

¶5

AJIBUL HOQUE

¶6

S/O- MD. SAYBAR ALI, VILL.- JAMLAI, CHENIMARA, P.S. NAGARBERA, DIST.- KAMRUP RURAL, ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM

¶9

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR A B SIDDIQUE

¶10

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶11

B E F O R E

¶12

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HITESH KUMAR SARMA

¶13

01-11-2021

¶14

This is an application made under Section 439 Cr.P.C., seeking bail by the accused-petitioner, namely, Ajibul Hoque , in connection with Nagarbera P.S. Case No.101/2021 , registered under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, read with Section 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012.

¶15

Page No.# 2/3

¶16

Heard Mr. A.B. Siddique, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the Respondent State.

¶17

The accused petitioner was forwarded to custody on 28.07.2021 and, as such, he has been in custody for more than 90 days as on date and the charge-sheet has not been laid within the statutorily prescribed period of 90 days, as submitted by Mr. Baruah, on instruction.

¶18

On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioner has sought bail on the ground of failure to complete the investigation within the statutorily prescribed time.

¶19

Therefore, since the investigation has not been completed within the statutorily prescribed period of 90 days, the petitioner is granted default bail.

¶20

Accordingly, the accused-petitioner, named above, shall be released on bail in connection with the case aforementioned on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- with two suitable sureties of the like amount, to the satisfaction of learned jurisdictional Special Judge under the POCSO Act .

¶21

The direction for bail is further subject to the conditions that the accused-petitioner:

¶22

(a) shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of learned jurisdictional Special Judge under the POCSO Act , without prior written permission from him;

¶23

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

¶24

Page No.# 3/3

¶25

¶26

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.

¶27

In terms of the above, this bail application stands disposed of.

¶28

JUDGE

¶29

Comparing Assistant

Ajibul Hoque v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajibul Hoque 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

Swapnil Boruah and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Riyajul Ali @ Riyazul Ali Vs the State of Assam

Mahabir Prasad Agarwala Vs the State of Assam

Ashutosh Dubey Vs Purnima Barman

Ashutosh Dubey Vs Purnima Barman

Raunak Pratim Mazumder @ Team Vs the State of Assam