Allowed

Atar Ali v. the State of Ap

Gauhati HC9 Aug 2022BA/67/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court allowed a bail application by an accused charged with rape under IPC and POCSO. Finding the investigation complete and the charge-sheet filed, the court deemed further detention unwarranted and granted bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 25,000 with a surety.

What did the court decide?

The accused be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 25,000 with one surety of like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, POCSO, Tezu.

Atar Ali Vs the State of Ap — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC040008212022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : BA 67/2022

¶5

1:Atar Ali S/o Md. Majim Ali,

¶6

a Resident of Tribal Colony (Tamla Nagar), Tezu, PO/PS Tezu, District Lohit, Arunachal Pradesh. Mob No. 9612519022

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE STATE OF AP Represented by the Public Prosecutor

¶9

Advocate for the Petitioner : C W Mantaw

¶10

Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP

¶11

BEFORE

¶12

HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Date : 09.08.2022

¶15

Heard Mr. C. W. Mantaw, learned counsel for the accused and also heard Mr. G. Tado, learned Additional P.P., for the State respondent.

¶16

This application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., is preferred by accused, namely, Habib Ali , who is languishing in jail hazot in connection with Tezu

¶17

Page No.# 2/3

¶18

Women P.S. Case No. 05/2022, under Section 354/376 IPC, read with Section 4 of the POCSO Act.

¶19

It is to be noted here that Tezu Women P.S. Case No. 05/2022, under Section 354/376 IPC, read with Section 4 of the POCSO Act, has been registered on the basis of one F.I.R. lodged by one Biresh Nath, on 15.06.2022, to the effect that on 15.06.2022 at around 17.45 hrs one Shri Habib Ali @ Fajayuddin, came to his house at Civil Supply Colony, Tezu and committed rape to his daughter Miss ‘X’ (name withheld), 10 yrs old.

¶20

The learned counsel for the accused submits that the accused was arrested on 15.06.2022, and since then, he is languishing in jail hazot. Mr. Mantaw also submits that a bare perusal of the F.I.R. no offence is under Sections 354/376 IPC, read with Section 4 of the POCSO Act, appears to be made out and that he is behind the bar for the last 55 days and therefore, it is contended to allow the application.

¶21

On the other hand, Mr. G. Tado, learned Additional P.P. has produced the Case Diary before this Court and submits that on completion of investigation, the I/O has laid Charge-sheet here in this case, vide Charge-sheet No. 04/22, under Section 354/354A (i) IPC read with Section 8 of the POCSO Act. And, as the offence is serious in nature, Mr. G. Tado contended to dismiss the application. Mr. G. Tado, also referred one case law of Prafulla Kumar Sahu Vs State of NCT of Delhi, in Bail Appln.2036/2021 & Crl.M.(Bail) 809/2021, reported in 18^th August, 2021 in support of his submission.

¶22

Having heard the submission of learned counsels of both sides, I have carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed of record and also

¶23

Page No.# 3/3

¶24

perused the Case Diary produced before this Court.

¶25

It appears that the investigation of this case has been already completed and the I/O has laid Charge-sheet vide Charge-sheet No. 04/22, under Sections 354/354A (i) IPC read with Section 8 of the POCSO Act, on 23.07.2022. The accused is behind the bar for last 55 days. Since, Charge-sheet has been submitted there is no question of hampering the investigation or tampering with the witnesses, and now trial will start and the accused has to prepare his defense.

¶26

In view of above, further custodial detention of the accused seems to be unwarranted here in this case and accordingly, it is provided that on furnishing a bond of Rs. 25,000/-(Rupees twenty five thousand) with one surety of like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, POCSO, Tezu, the accused be enlarged on bail.

¶27

I have carefully gone through the case law referred by Mr. G. Tado, and I find that the ratio laid down therein is not applicable in all force to the facts and circumstances here in this case.

¶28

In terms of above, this bail application stands disposed of.

¶29

Case Diary be returned back.

¶30

JUDGE

¶31

Comparing Assistant

Atar Ali v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Atar Ali v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jenlong Mophuk and Anr. Vs the State of Ap

Susanta Saha Vs the State of Ap

Mithun Chakrawati Vs the State of Ap

Domin Lomi Vs Yommar Ingo and 8 Ors.

Tana Abo Vs the State of Ap

Nido Kapa and Anr. Vs the State of Ap