Allowed

Jaynab Nessa @ Jainab Nessa v. the Union of India and 5 Ors.

Gauhati HC9 Nov 2022I.A.(Civil)/3202/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant sought clarification that she may remain on bail after appearing before the Superintendent of Police with required documents. The Court clarified this intention and extended the appearance deadline by two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Clarification that the applicant may remain on bail after appearing with documents; appearance deadline extended by two weeks.

Jaynab Nessa @ Jainab Nessa Vs the Union of India… — Writ and Judicial Review | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010222912022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3202/2022 in WP(C) 6791/2022

¶5

JAYNAB NESSA @ JAINAB NESSA WIFE OF MAFIZUDDIN MALLIK, DAUGHTER OF LATE MONSER ALI MIYA, PERMANENT RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- GELABIL, P.S.- TARABARI, IN THE DISTRICT OF BARPETA, ASSAM. PIN-

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI. PIN- 110001.

¶8

2:THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER NEW DELHI- 110001.

¶9

3:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM HOME DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781006.

¶10

4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

¶11

BARPETA 781301.

¶12

5:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B) BARPETA 781301 ASSAM.

¶13

Page No.# 2/3

¶14

6:THE COORDINATOR NATIOANAL REGISTER OF CITIZENS BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI-4

¶15

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR SARFRAZ NAWAZ

¶16

Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I.

¶17

BEFORE

¶18

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N. KOTISWAR SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY

¶19

ORDER

¶20

09.11.2022

¶21

[ N. Kotiswar Singh, J. ]

¶22

Heard Mr. A.W. Aman, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Ms. J. Sarma, learned CGC, appearing for respondent No.1; Mr. G. Sarma, learned special counsel, FT, appearing for respondent Nos.3 and 5; Mr. A.I. Ali, learned standing counsel, ECI, appearing for respondent No.2; Ms. U. Das, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam, appearing for respondent No.4 and Ms. L. Devi, learned standing counsel, NRC, appearing for respondent No.6.

¶23

2. The present application has been filed for seeking a clarification/modification of the order dated 27.10.2022 passed in WP(C) No.6791/2022, in which though this Court had passed an order directing the applicant/petitioner to appear before the Superintendent of Police (Border), Barpeta on or before 21.11.2022 along with a certified copy of that order and also to prove the fingerprints and biometrics as well as details of her address including her mobile/phone number before the S.P.(Border), Barpeta, the order aforesaid order does not clearly mention that she may be allowed to remain on bail on furnishing such information.

¶24

3. It has been submitted that in absence of a clear order allowing the petitioner to remain on bail on furnishing such information as directed, the applicant apprehends that she may be

¶25

Page No.# 3/3

¶26

detained. Accordingly, the present application has been filed seeking clarification that it may be mentioned that on appearing before the S.P.(Border), Barpeta and also after furnishing necessary information as directed by this Court, she may be allowed to remain on bail.

¶27

4. We have gone through the order dated 27.10.2022 passed by this Court in WP(C) No.6791/2022. The intention of this Court was to allow the applicant/petitioner to remain on bail on her appearance before the Superintendent of Police (Border), Barpeta, on or before 21.11.2022 and to furnishing necessary document/information as directed, which is not clearly mentioned that the petitioner may be allowed to remain on bail.

¶28

5. Accordingly, we make it clear that the applicant may be allowed to remain on bail on fulfilling the conditions mentioned in the said order dated 27.10.2022. However, we extend the period of appearance before the Superintendent of Police (Border), Barpeta by another 2(two) weeks' time from today. Accordingly the applicant will now appear before the Superintendent of Police (Border), Barpeta, within a period of 2(two) weeks from today during the office hours between 10 a.m. to 4.30 p.m. along with the certified copy of this order.

¶29

6. I.A. stands disposed of.

¶30

Sd/- Arun Dev Choudhury Sd/- N. Kotiswar Singh JUDGE JUDGE

¶31

Comparing Assistant

Jaynab Nessa @ Jainab Nessa v. the Union of India and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaynab Nessa @ Jainab Nessa v. the Union of India and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

MD Fariuddin Ahmed and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Sri Milan Swargiary Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Kamal Rajbongshi Vs State of Assam

K. Sreedhar Rao Vs the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Md. Mazibar Ali @ Mojibar Ali Vs the Union of India and 5 Ors.

Musst. Basiran Nesa Vs the Union of India and 7 Ors.