In a pre-arrest bail application under Section 438 CrPC, the Gauhati High Court refused bail to two accused persons who were alleged abductors of a minor girl. The Court found sufficient incriminating materials and noted that another crime and the other accused were pending investigation with evasion of arrest.
pre-arrest bail application is rejected.
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.# 1/3
GAHC010086232023
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/1476/2023
SAKIL HOQUE AND ANR
S/O- NUROL HOQUE (KHUTALU), R/O- VILLAGE- BHAMANDANGA PART-I, P.S. AGOMANI, DIST.- DHUBRI, ASSAM
2: BABIDUL HOQUE S/O- NUROL HOQUE R/O- VILLAGE- BHAMANDANGA PART-I P.S. AGOMANI DIST.- DHUBRI ASSA
VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY P.P., ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A T SARKAR
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
Page No.# 2/3
BEFORE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK
ORDER
09-06-2023
Heard Mr. A. T. Sarkar learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. M. P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the State.
By this application under Section 438 CrPC, the petitioners, who are brothers, namely, 1) Sakil Hoque and 2) Babiul Hoque, apprehending their arrest are seeking pre-arrest bail in Agomoni P.S. Case No.13/2023 registered under Sections 365/34 IPC corresponding to G.R. No. 106/2023.
As per the FIR of the case dated 22.01.2023 lodged by the informant, father of the victim girl alleging that on 18.01.2023 his minor daughter was kidnapped by the FIR named accused No.1 along with other FIR named accused persons including the present petitioners. Accordingly, Agomoni P.S. Case No.13/2023 was registered against the petitioners and other accused persons.
Perused the case diary produced before the Court today by Mr. M. P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam.
Case diary revels that the most of the FIR named accused persons excepting the present accused petitioners, the FIR named accused person No.1 and 2 and two others are evading arrest and are absconding from their place of residence.
The minor victim girl has not yet been recovered.
CDR reveals that the victim was taken to Char areas of Dhubri, then to Bihar, then to Haryana and then to Punjab Border and back to Delhi and then to Kerala and since then, the further details could not be obtained as call details found missing from the relevant numbers.
On instruction of the petitioners, Mr. Sarkar, learned counsel submitted that the petitioners are working at Guwahati, whereas, the case diary reveals that father of the petitioners stated before police in his 161 statement that since the date of incident, the petitioners are working outside the State of Assam and did not visit their house.
Page No.# 3/3
Finding sufficient incriminating materials in the case diary against the petitioners regarding their involvement in the alleged crime, the Court is of the view that it is not a fit case to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioners, namely, 1) Sakil Hoque and 2) Babiul Hoque, in said Agomoni P.S. Case No.13/2023.
Accordingly, this pre-arrest bail application of the petitioners, namely, 1) Sakil Hoque and 2) Babiul Hoque, in said Agomoni P.S. Case No.13/2023 stands rejected.
Return the case diary herewith.
Comparing Assistant
2 issues framed by the court
Whether pre-arrest bail should be granted under Section 438 CrPC to petitioners apprehending arrest in a kidnapping case?
Whether the missing victim and other accused evading arrest make the petitioners ineligible for bail?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sakil Hoque
Babiul Hoque
The State of Assam
Manash Ranjan Pathak
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
