Partly allowed

Moon Das and 3 Ors. v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC21 Jul 2022AB/1609/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court disposed of an anticipatory bail application. Petitioner No. 1 was granted reject due to prima facie material implicating him in POCSO and IPC offences. Petitioners 2, 3, and 4 were granted pre-arrest bail upon furnishing a bond subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for PAB of Petitioner No. 1 rejected; PAB granted to Petitioners Nos. 2, 3 & 4 on bonds of Rs. 20,000/- each with surety and standard conditions.

Moon Das and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Assam — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010111422022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB/1609/2022

¶5

MOON DAS AND 3 ORS S/O SRI KULO DAS R/O JYOTI NAGAR, STATION BLOCK WARD NO. 4, P.O. AND P.S. UDALGURI DIST. UDALGURI, PIN-784509, ASSAM

¶6

2: SRI BHASKAR JYOTI DAS S/O SRI MOON DAS R/O JYOTI NAGAR STATION BLOCK WARD NO. 4 P.O. AND P.S. UDALGURI DIST. UDALGURI PIN-784509 ASSAM

¶7

3: SMT. KHUBOLA DAS S/O LATE GOBINDA DAS R/O JYOTI NAGAR STATION BLOCK WARD NO. 4 P.O. AND P.S. UDALGURI DIST. UDALGURI PIN-784509 ASSAM 4: SMT. POHOTI DAS W/O KHULADHAR DAS R/O JYOTI NAGAR STATION BLOCK WARD NO. 4 P.O. AND P.S. UDALGURI DIST. UDALGURI PIN-784509 ASSA

¶8

Page No.# 2/3

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶11

2:SMTI. RITAMONI DAS W/O. LATE BAPON DAS R/O STATION BLOCK WARD NO. 4 P.- UDALGURI DIST.- UDALGURI PIN-78450

¶12

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R C SAIKIA

¶13

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶14

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BORTHAKUR

¶15

ORDER

¶16

Date : 21.07.2022

¶17

Heard Mr. R. C. Saikia, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also Heard Mr. R. J. Baruah, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam appearing for the State respondent.

¶18

This petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C., is filed for granting the privilege of prearrest bail to the petitioners, namely, 1. Sri Moon Das, 2. Sri Bhaskar Jyoti Das, 3. Smt Khubola Das, 4. Smt Pohoti Das, apprehending arrest in connection with Udalguri P.S. Case No. 55/2022 registered u/s 448/354A of the IPC read with Section 8 of the POCSO Act.

¶19

The case diary, as called for, is placed before the Court.

¶20

The FIR reveals the allegation that on 11.05.2022 at about 10.30 AM, when the niece of the informant was alone in her own house, at that time, the petitioner No. 1 trespassed into her house and sexually assaulted her. Thereafter, she somehow

¶21

Page No.# 3/3

¶22

managed to escape from his hand and reported the informant about the incident.

¶23

Perusal of the case diary reveals prima facie implicating material against the petitioner No. 1 and further the victim, who is aged about 16 years, in her statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., has implicated the petitioner with the offences alleged. Therefore, his prayer for pre-arrest bail stands rejected.

¶24

However, subject to final outcome in investigation, perusal of the case diary reveals prima facie no incriminating material against the petitioner Nos. 2, 3 & 4, and, as such, this Court is of the opinion that custodial interrogation of the petitioner Nos. 2, 3 & 4 may not be necessary in the interest of investigation in the case.

¶25

Accordingly, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the petitioner Nos. 2, 3 & 4, named above, shall be released on pre-arrest bail, in connection with the above noted case on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- each with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority, subject, of course, to the following conditions:

¶26

(i) That the petitioner Nos. 2, 3 & 4 shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 7 days, failing which on and from the 8^th day, this prearrest bail order shall have no force; and

¶27

(ii) That the petitioner Nos. 2, 3 & 4 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.

¶28

Return the case diary.

¶29

This disposes off the anticipatory bail application.

¶30

JUDGE

¶31

Comparing Assistant

Moon Das and 3 Ors. v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Moon Das and 3 Ors. 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

Dhiraj Kumar Vs the State of Assam

Md. Fakrul Islam Vs the State of Assam

Md. Mokbul Hussain Vs the State of Assam

Abdul Karim Vs the State of Assam

Golam Hussain Vs the State of Assam

Rofikul Islam Vs the State of Assam