Allowed

Abul Salam @ Md. Abul Salam v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC5 Aug 2022AB/1566/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application. The court held that given the delay in lodging the FIR and pendency of divorce proceedings by the informant, custodial detention was not warranted. The earlier interim order was made absolute without new conditions.

What did the court decide?

The petition is allowed; the interim order stands absolute with the same conditions.

Abul Salam @ Md. Abul Salam Vs the State of Assam — Anticipatory Bail | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010111412022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB/1566/2022

¶5

ABUL SALAM @ MD. ABUL SALAM S/O LT. SAHABUDDIN AHMED R/O H. NO. 16, SHANTI PATH, NEAR SAHAB LODGE JATIA, KAHILIPARA ROAD, P.S. DISPUR, GUWAHATI, KAMRUP (M), ASSAM, PIN-781019

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶8

Advocate for the Petitioner : MD. M H CHOUDHURY

¶9

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶10

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI ORDER

¶11

05-08-2022

¶12

Heard Shri M.H. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel for the applicant, namely, Abul Salam @ Md. Abul Salam, who has filed this anticipatory bail application under Section 438 of the Cr.PC praying for pre-arrest bail in connection with Dispur PS Case No. 1232/2022 registered under Sections 498(A)/325/494 of the IPC.

¶13

Pursuant to the order dated 09.06.2022, the Case Diary has been produced by Shri P. Borthakur, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam.

¶14

Page No.# 2/2

¶15

Shri Choudhury, the learned Senior Counsel has submitted that a reading of the F.I.R. would reveal that no offence under Section 498 (A) is made out and to substantiate the said submission, the learned Senior Counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to other proceedings instituted between the parties. He submits that the informant on her own volition had left the matrimonial home long time back and has also instituted a divorce proceeding against him. Thereafter, another proceeding under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. has been initiated followed by lodging of the present case.

¶16

It is submitted that while calling for the Case Diary, interim protection has been granted to the petitioner pursuant to which he had appeared before the I.O.

¶17

Shri Borthakur, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam, however, submits that there are materials to prima facie sustain the allegations against the petitioner.

¶18

After hearing the parties and on consideration of the materials before this Court in the Case Diary, including the fact that the F.I.R. has been lodged after an inordinate delay and in the meantime, an application for divorce filed by the informant is pending, this Court is of the view that the custodial detention of the petitioner may not be warranted.

¶19

In view of the above, the present petition is allowed and the interim order passed earlier stands absolute with the same conditions.

¶20

The petitioner is however directed to continue to render full cooperation to the investigation / prosecution and not to indulge in any activities detrimental to the same.

¶21

The bail application accordingly stands disposed of.

¶22

Case Diary returned herewith.

¶23

JUDGE

¶24

Comparing Assistant

Abul Salam @ Md. Abul Salam v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abul Salam @ Md. Abul Salam 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

Munindra Das Vs the State of Assam

Mortooz Ali Laskar and 5 Ors. Vs Sharaf Uddin Laskar and 7 Ors.

Kamal Ali Vs the State of Assam

Smti Surya Devi Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Chintu Kalita Vs the State of Assam

Amrit Saikia Vs the State of Assam