Allowed

Sayed Archidul Ahmed and 3 Ors. v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC16 Feb 2022AB/28/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court granted pre-arrest bail to four petitioners. While interim bail granted earlier to some was made absolute, the Court specifically granted pre-arrest bail to Petitioner No.1 due to lack of material for his custodial interrogation.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to petitioners; Petitioner No.1 to furnish a bond of Rs.15,000 with surety upon arrest.

Sayed Archidul Ahmed and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Assam — Dowry and Cruelty | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010003172022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB/28/2022

¶5

SAYED ARCHIDUL AHMED AND 3 ORS S/O LATE RAIJUDDIN AHMED RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SANDHELI PS BELSAR 781353 DIST NALBARI. ASSAM

¶6

2: SYEDA RITA BEGUM D/O LATE RAIJUDDIN AHMED RESIDENT OF GOLDEN PATH KAILASH NAGAR HATIGAON GUWAHATI 781038 DIST KAMRUP M ASSAM

¶7

3: SYEDA JEUTY BEGUM D/O LATE RAIJUDDIN AHMED RESIDENT OF BY LANE NO 1 BISHNY RABHA PATH PS TEZPUR DIST SONITPUR ASSAM 784001

¶8

4: SYEDA ABUJAN AHMED W/O LATE RAIJUDDIN AHMED RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SANDHELI PS BELSAR DIST NALBARI ASSAM 781353 VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY PP ASSAM

¶10

Page No.# 2/3

¶11

-----------Advocate for : MR. P DEKA Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM

¶12

B E F O R E

¶13

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HITESH KUMAR SARMA

¶14

16-02-2022

¶15

This is an application made under Section 438 Cr.P.C., seeking pre-arrest bail by the petitioners, namely, Sayed Archidul Ahmed, Syeda Rita Begum, Syeda Jeuty Begum and Syeda Abujan Begum, apprehending arrest in connection with Belsar Police Station Case No. 522 of 2021, registered under Sections 498(A)/294/509/323/328/ 315/324/34 of the IPC, read with Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and Section 4 of the Muslim Women (Protection of right of marriage) Act.

¶16

Heard Mr. P. Bora, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. R.R. Kaushik, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the State Respondent assisted by Mr. P.K. Munir, learned counsel for the informant.

¶17

Perused the case diary produced.

¶18

On perusal of the materials in the case diary, it is found that although the petitioners are implicated, yet the primary allegation is against the husband of the informant, who is not an applicant in this application.

¶19

On the other hand, the petitioners, except petitioner No.1, are on interim bail and they have appeared before the investigating police officer and their statements have been recorded. They have not misused the liberty granted to them while availing the interim protection.

¶20

Considering the materials in the case diary, the interim protection

¶21

Page No.# 3/3

¶22

granted to the petitioners No.2 to 4, vide order dated 6.1.2022, is made absolute by this order on the same terms and conditions.

¶23

So far petitioner No.1 is concerned, as indicated above, there is no such material requiring his custodial interrogation. Therefore, he is also granted the privilege of pre-arrest bail.

¶24

Accordingly, it is provided that in the event of arrest of the petitioner No.1 above named, in connection with the case aforementioned, he shall be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.15,000/- with a suitable surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of arresting authority.

¶25

The direction for pre-arrest bail is subject to the conditions that the petitioner No.1 :

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

(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.

¶29

The petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶30

Return the case diary.

¶31

JUDGE

¶32

Comparing Assistant

Sayed Archidul Ahmed and 3 Ors. v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sayed Archidul Ahmed 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

Abdul Baset @ Iffu Vs the State of Assam

Md. Abdul Matin Vs the State of Assam

Rabiul Ali @ Rabiyal Ali @ Tilabar Vs the State of Assam

Sayed Aminul Haque Ahmed and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Fokir Ali Vs the State of Assam

Julhas Ali @ Juhas Ali Vs the State of Assam