Dismissed

Borhan Uddin Ahmed @ Borhan Ali v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC12 Dec 2022AB/3100/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court rejected an application for pre-arrest bail under Section 438 CrPC. The court held that ample incriminating materials existed and the case was not fit for the privilege of pre-arrest bail, recalling an interim order dated 26.10.2022.

What did the court decide?

Application for pre-arrest bail under Section 438 CrPC rejected; interim order dated 26.10.2022 recalled.

Borhan Uddin Ahmed @ Borhan Ali Vs the State of Assam — Anticipatory Bail | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010213582022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB/3100/2022

¶5

BORHAN UDDIN AHMED @ BORHAN ALI S/O ABDUL BAREK VILL- UJANPETLA PART-II P.S. TAMARHAT DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶8

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N UDDIN

¶9

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶10

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY

¶11

ORDER

¶12

Date : 12-12-2022

¶13

Heard Mr. N. Uddin, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent State of Assam.

¶14

By this application under Section 438, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

¶15

Page No.# 2/3

¶16

[CrPC], the petitioner viz. Borhan Uddin Ahmed @ Borhan Ali has approached this Court seeking the benefit of pre-arrest bail, apprehending his arrest, in connection with Tamarhat Police Station Case no. 43/2022 registered for offences punishable under Sections 448/354/354A[1][i]/376[1]/511, Indian Penal Code [IPC].

¶17

As per the First Information Report [FIR] lodged on 15.08.2022, the petitioner had intruded into the house of the informant through the window at around 11-00 p.m. on 07.08.2022 when there was no other person present in the house of the informant and thereafter, after gagging the mouth of the informant by a gamusa and embracing her, tried to commit sexual assault forcibly upon her. When the informant raised hue and cry, the petitioner had fled away from the scene through the window of the house. The informant has mentioned that the elders from the petitioner’s side made false assurance that the matter would be amicably settled and as a result of that, there was a delay in lodging in FIR.

¶18

Mr. Uddin, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the FIR. The petitioner is from the same village and the informant’s husband had borrowed an amount of Rs. 15,000/from the petitioner. The FIR has been lodged in order to avoid repayment of the borrowed amount.

¶19

Mr. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor who has received the case diary, has submitted that in the statements recorded under Section 164, CrPC as well as under Section 161, CrPC, the informant has reiterated the version made in the FIR. The statements of the witnesses recorded under Section 161, CrPC go to indicate that there was intrusion of the petitioner inside the house of the informant on that particular night and on raising hue and cry

¶20

Page No.# 3/3

¶21

by the informant, the petitioner had fled away from the scene. The witnesses have further stated that the informant was in a frightened state of mind and the occurrence of the incident was immediately communicated to her husband who, in turn, had communicated the incident to the other co-villagers immediately.

¶22

Having regard to the ample incriminating materials against the petitioner, this court is of the considered view that it is not a fit case to extend the privilege of pre-arrest bail under Section 438, CrPC to the petitioner. Accordingly, by recalling the interim order dated 26.10.2022, the instant application for prearrest bail is rejected.

¶23

JUDGE

¶24

Comparing Assistant

Borhan Uddin Ahmed @ Borhan Ali v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Borhan Uddin Ahmed @ Borhan Ali 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

Ambika Basumatary @ Ambrika Basumuatariy Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Allaudin and 4 Ors. Vs the State of Assam

Anil Kr Sah and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Abhiram Borgohain and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam

Bipul Boruah @ Sri Bickey Boruah Vs the State of Assam

Hussain Ali Mandal @ Hosen Ali Mandal Vs the State of Assam