Allowed

Swgwmsar Mochahary @ Samar and Anr. v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC18 May 2022AB/216/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court, in a bail application under Section 438 CrPC regarding an FIR alleging cheating, cruelty, and counterfeiting, found no supporting evidence in the case diary for the husband's alleged illicit relations or marriage to another woman. Consequently, the Court held that custodial detention was not warranted and confirmed the earlier interim bail as absolute.

What did the court decide?

Interim bail granted earlier was confirmed and made absolute; the bail application stands allowed.

Swgwmsar Mochahary @ Samar and Anr. Vs the State of Assam — Domestic Violence | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010012802022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB/216/2022

¶5

SWGWMSAR MOCHAHARY @ SAMAR AND ANR. S/O LATE SURESH MOCHAHARY VILL- KOTHALGURI P.S. KOKRAJHAR DIST. KOKRAJHAR, ASSAM

¶6

2: SANJITA BASUMATARY VILL- KOTHALGURI P.S. KOKRAJHAR DIST. KOKRAJHAR ASSA VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶8

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P K DAS

¶9

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶10

:: BEFORE ::

¶11

HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE RUMI KUMARI PHUKAN

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

18.05.2022

¶14

By filing this petition under Section 438 of the CrPC, the petitioners,

¶15

Page No.# 2/2

¶16

namely- (1) Swgwmsar Mochahary @ Samar and (2) Sanjita Basumatary have sought for privilege of pre-arrest bail, in the event of arrest, in connection with Kokrajhar P.S. Case No.876/2021 under Sections 420/498(A)/494/313/34 of IPC.

¶17

Heard the learned counsel for both sides.

¶18

Received the case diary and perused the same. Also, gone through the documents that has been annexed.

¶19

The informant here is the wife of the present accused petitioner no.1 and the accused no.2 is the sister-in-law of the petitioner no.1.

¶20

Case diary reveals that raising serious doubt upon her husband that the accused petitioner no.1 might have illicit relation with the petitioner no.2, there were frequent quarrel between the informant/complainant and the petitioner no.1 and an FIR was lodged against both of them raising certain allegations. But, however, no any supporting evidence is discernible as regard the allegation made in the FIR that her husband married the other accused person i.e. petitioner no.2, and miscarriage, cruelty etc. to attract the offence alleged.

¶21

That being so, custodial detention of both the accused petitioners, in the given facts and circumstances is not warranted. Accordingly, interim bail so granted earlier is hereby made absolute.

¶22

The application for bail stands allowed.

¶23

Return the case diary.

¶24

JUDGE

¶25

Comparing Assistant

Swgwmsar Mochahary @ Samar and Anr. v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Swgwmsar Mochahary @ Samar and Anr. 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

Abdul Jalil Mazumdar @ Jalil Ahmed Mazumdar and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Dipti Gogoi Vs the State of Assam

Bulbuli Saikia Vs Jadav Saikia

Debaram Pegu @ Dewaram Pegu Vs the State of Assam

Mahima Begum @ Mahima Beg Vs the State of Assam

Ashad Ali @ Gatu Sk Vs the State of Assam