The Gauhati High Court heard an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 CrPC where the petitioner alleged the FIR was an afterthought and lacked substance regarding rape charges. The court found custodial interrogation unnecessary.
Earlier interim bail order made absolute; anticipatory bail application disposed of.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010176832021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/3486/2021
FAJUL UDDIN LASKAR S/ O LATE JAMSED ALI LASKAR R/O VILL- BARJURAI (BERENGA PART-V) P.O. BETHUKANDI, P.S. SILCHAR DIST. CACHAR, ASSAM, PIN-788005
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. I H LASKAR
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE
HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE RUMI KUMARI PHUKAN
ORDER
17.01.2022
By way of this bail application filed under Section 438 CrPC, petitioner, namely, Fajul Uddin Laskar, has sought for pre-arrest bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Silchar PS Case No. 2105/2021 (GR Case No. 3590/2021), under Sections 294/352/354(B)/447/506/34 IPC.
Page No.# 2/2
Heard the learned counsel for both the parties.
The Case Diary has been produced and perused.
Attention has been drawn by the petitioner to the FIR filed by the petitioner on 26.06.2021 against the present informant and two others, which has been registered as Silchar PS Case No. 2068/2021, under Sections 448/379/34 IPC and subsequent thereto, the present FIR has been filed on 02.07.2021 by the informant.
On perusal of the documents annexed and the two FIRs that have been filed, it reveals that the informant herein filed the FIR in a vague manner in the sense that she has not filed any FIR against the purporting act of the present petitioner’s attempt to commit rape upon her in the year 2020 and the subsequent FIR, i.e., in the present FIR she has also not assigned any reason for her delay in filing the FIR.
From all entirety of the matter, it reveals that the present FIR may be an afterthought by the informant in order to check the earlier FIR filed against her. The petitioner is otherwise the father-in-law of the informant and she left her matrimonial home long back.
Considering all entirety of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not necessary. Interim bail order passed earlier on 29.10.2021, is hereby made absolute.
Anticipatory Bail Application stands disposed of.
Return the Case Diary.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
2 issues framed by the court
Whether custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary given the vague nature of the FIR and delay in filing.
Whether the bail application should be disposed of or made absolute.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
FAJUL UDDIN LASKAR
THE STATE OF ASSAM
RUMI KUMARI PHUKAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
