Allowed

Zahanara Begum v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC7 Nov 2022AB/2957/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court considered an application to make interim anticipatory bail absolute. The petitioner, not being an FIR accused, sought release on conditions. The Court deemed custodial interrogation unnecessary and granted bail subject to cooperation and not impeding investigation.

What did the court decide?

Interim pre-arrest bail made absolute subject to conditions; bail application disposed of.

Zahanara Begum Vs the State of Assam — Cheating and Forgery | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010206412022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB/2957/2022

¶5

ZAHANARA BEGUM W/O ROBIUL BASIR TALUKDAR VILL- DUBACHURI PT.I, P.S. MERERCHAR DIST. BONGAIGAON, ASSAM

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶8

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P RAHMAN

¶9

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶10

BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND

¶11

ORDER

¶12

Date : 07.11.2022

¶13

Heard Mr. P. Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. KK Das, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam appearing for the State respondent.

¶14

It is submitted that the petitioner is on interim bail granted by this Court vide order dated 30.09.2022, passed in this anticipatory bail application. The

¶15

Page No.# 2/3

¶16

petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Mererchar P.S. Case No. 37/2022 registered under Sections 420/468IPC.

¶17

Perused the case diary produced by the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor.

¶18

One Sri Debojyoti Arya lodger a written FIR against the petitioner on 30.08.2022 alleging inter alia that the FIR named accused China Khatun, a Grade-IV employee of Mererchar R.P.H.C. supplies certificate for Covid-19 vaccination without administering vaccine after taking Rs. 200/- from each person endangering the life of the public at large.

¶19

The present petitioner Zahanara Begum is not an FIR named accused and she has appeared before the I.O. and her statement has been recorded.

¶20

I have considered the submission of the learned counsel for both the parties.

¶21

The custodial interrogation of the petitioner does not appear to be necessary.

¶22

Accordingly, the interim pre-arrest bail granted vide order, dated 30.09.2022, passed by this Court, is hereby made absolute, subject to the following conditions-

¶23

(i) That the petitioner shall co-operate in investigation as and when required;

¶24

(ii) That the petitioner 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, and

¶25

Page No.# 3/3

¶26

(iii) That the petitioner shall not hamper or temper with the investigation in any manner.

¶27

Return the case diary.

¶28

The bail application stands disposed of.

¶29

JUDGE

¶30

Comparing Assistant

Zahanara Begum v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Zahanara Begum 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

Gumin Darung Vs the State of Ap

Jobom Chang Mengu Vs the State of Ap

Tanchung Namsa Vs the State of Ap

Kushadev Mahanta Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Thokchom Surjit Singh Vs the State of Assam

Dilip Nath and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam