Policed HC rejected pre-arrest bail petition under Section 438 CrPC in an FIR alleging insurance fraud involving a false cause of death. Court held sufficient materials existed in the case diary and it was not a fit case for anticipatory bail.
Petition under Section 438 CrPC rejected. Petitioner directed to return case diary forthwith.
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
GAHC010204412021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/4165/2021
TAFIZ UDDIN AHMED S/O KALIM UDDIN VILL- SATRA KANARA P.O. SATRA KANARA BAZAR P.S. BAGHBAR, DIST. BARPETA, ASSAM, PIN-781308
VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE LEARNED PP, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S AHMED
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE
HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE RUMI KUMARI PHUKAN
O R D E R
07.01.2022.
By filing this petition under Section 438 of the CrPC, petitioner Tafiz Uddin Ahmed has sought for pre-arrest bail in connection with Nalbari P.S. Case No.763/2019, under Sections 406/420/471/468/34 of the IPC.
Page No.# 2/2
Heard learned counsel for both sides and perused the record and case diary.
As per the FIR, one Ajam Ali Khan had applied for two policies of ICICI Prudential Life Insurance on 07.05.2018 and 21.05.2018 and accordingly two policies were issued in his name, making Smti Noorjahan Khatun as the nominee. Thereafter said Noorjahan Khatun raised a death claim with the company on 04.09.2018, stating death of her husband as on 15.06.2018. In support of her claim, said Noorjahan Khatun also submitted the death certificate as well as the medical documents of her husband.
It appears that the death certificate of the insured was issued by the present petitioner, showing a false date of death of Ajam Ali Khan. There is sufficient materials against the present accused/petitioner in the case diary.
In view of above, this is not a fit case to grant the privilege of Section 438 of the CrPC, to the present accused/ petitioner and accordingly the present petition stands rejected. Return back the case diary forthwith.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petition under Section 438 CrPC for pre-arrest bail in connection with insurance fraud charge should be allowed.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
TAFIZ UDDIN AHMED
THE STATE OF ASSAM
RUMI KUMARI PHUKAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
