Allowed

Ruman Shaikh v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC8 Dec 2023AB/2935/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. allowed for an apprehended arrest in a case involving Sections 376 IPC (2)(n), 506 IPC and Section 6 POCSO. Petitioner submitted he is now married to the victim. Bail of Rs. 50,000 granted.

What did the court decide?

Bail of Rs. 50,000 with suitable surety allowed, conditioned on appearing before IO, cooperating with investigation, and not threatening or tampering with evidence.

Ruman Shaikh Vs the State of Assam — Narcotics (NDPS) | Gauhati HC (2023)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010185472023

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB/2935/2023

¶5

RUMAN SHAIKH S/O KANDU SK,

¶6

VILL.- 2 NO. PUBERGAON, P.S.- MANKACHAR, DIST.- SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR, ASSAM.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PUBLIC POSECUTORS.

¶9

2:MONJILA KHATUN D/O- LATE MOZIBAR RAHMAN

¶10

RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- JORDANGA PART-I P.S- MANKACHAR DISTRICT- SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSA

¶11

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M AHMED

¶12

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶13

BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND

¶14

ORDER

¶15

Date : 08-12-2023

¶16

Page No.# 2/2

¶17

1. Heard Mr. HRA Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner assisted by learned counsel Mr. I.H. Laskar.

¶18

2. The petitioner Ruman Shaikh has filed this application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. with prayer of pre-arrest bail as he is apprehending arrest in connection with Mankachar P.S. Case No. 317/2023 under Sections 376(2)(n)/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

¶19

3. Heard Mr. M.P. Goswami, learned Addl. PP, Assam for respondent No. 1 and Mr. R. Islam, learned counsel for the informant respondent No.2.

¶20

4. I have considered the submissions at the Bar.

¶21

5. It is submitted at the Bar that the allegation against the petitioner is that he had a relationship with the victim but he had refused to marry her. At present the petitioner is married to the victim and an affidavit has been filed by the petitioner along with the copy of the notarized marriage agreement. It is submitted that marriage has also been solemnized between the petitioner and the present victim and they are staying as husband and wife. No case u/s 6 of the POCSO Act is made out. The victim has also attained majority.

¶22

6. I have also considered the submission that custodial interrogation of the petitioner may not be required as investigation has progressed to a considerable extent. The learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 has not raised any objection.

¶23

7. Considering all aspects, petition is allowed. In the event of his arrest the petitioner shall be enlarged on bail of Rs. 50,000/- with a suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority under the condition that:-

¶24

i] the petitioner shall appear before the IO and co-operate with the investigation; and

¶25

ii] the petitioner shall not exercise threats and tamper with the evidence, failing which prayer for bail shall stand cancelled.

¶26

8. Send back the Case Diary.

¶27

JUDGE

¶28

Comparing Assistant

Ruman Shaikh v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ruman Shaikh 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

Champa Marak Vs Medhi Marak and Ors.

Vaibhav Kalyani and 2 Ors. Vs Smt. Sakshi Sharda and Anr.

Ratna Barman and 4 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Samad Fakir @ Samad Ali and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Rajpal Singh Poonia Vs the State of Assam

Aktar Ali and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.