Partly allowed

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

Gauhati HC16 Feb 2022AB/74/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Garh涨停 High Court considered an application for pre-arrest bail under Section 438 CrPC in a dowry harassment case. Bail for the complained husband was rejected due to threat to witnesses; bail for his brother was granted with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail to Petitioner No.1 rejected; Bail to Petitioner No.2 granted with surety and conditions to appear and assist investigation.

Sayed Aminul Haque Ahmed and Anr. 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/74/2022

¶5

SAYED AMINUL HAQUE AHMED AND ANR S/O LATE RIAJUDDIN AHMED R/O VILL- SANDHELI P.S. BELSAR, PIN CODE- 781353 DIST. NALBARI, ASSAM

¶6

2: SAYED AZHARUL AHMED S/O LATE RIAJUDDIN AHMED R/O VILL- SANDHELI P.S. BELSAR PIN CODE- 781353 DIST. NALBARI ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶7

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. PRAN BORA

¶8

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶9

B E F O R E

¶10

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HITESH KUMAR SARMA

¶11

16-02-2022

¶12

This is an application, filed under Section 438 of the Cr.PC. seeking pre-arrest bail of the accused-petitioners, namely, 1) Sayed

¶13

Page No.# 2/3

¶14

Aminul Haque Ahmed, and 2) Sayed Azharul Ahmed, in connection with Belsar P.S. Case No.522/2021 registered under Sections 498(A)/294/509/323/328/315/324/34 of the Indian Penal Code, read with Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and Section 4 of the Muslim Women (Protection of right of marriage) Act.

¶15

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

¶16

Case diary produced has been perused.

¶17

The materials in the case dairy clearly indicate the involvement of the petitioner No.1-Sayed Aminul Haque Ahmed, the husband of the informant, to have committed the alleged offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. There is material in the case diary including a note of the investigating officer, that the petitioners are threatening the witnesses of the case.

¶18

In view of the above, the prayer of bail of petitioner No.1-Sayed Aminul Haque Ahmed, is rejected.

¶19

In so far as petitioner No.2 is concerned, he is the brother of the husband of the informant/petitioner No.1 and his involvement is not to such an extent that his custodial interrogation is essential. Therefore, he is granted the privilege of pre-arrest bail.

¶20

Accordingly, it is provided that in the event of arrest of the petitioner No.2, 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

¶21

Page No.# 3/3

¶22

authority.

¶23

The direction for pre-arrest bail is subject to the conditions that the petitioner No.2 :

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

(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.

¶27

The petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶28

Return the case diary.

¶29

JUDGE

¶30

Comparing Assistant

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sayed Aminul Haque Ahmed and Anr. 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 Archidul Ahmed and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Assam

Fokir Ali Vs the State of Assam

Julhas Ali @ Juhas Ali Vs the State of Assam