Dismissed

Babul Sk @ Babu v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Gauhati HC16 Sept 2024AB/1602/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment dismisses an anticipatory bail application filed by Babul Sk under Section 438 Cr.P.C. regarding a POCSO incident. After reviewing the case diary and victim statement, noting the petitioner's identification as one of four accused, the court rejected the prayer and vacated interim protection.

What did the court decide?

The bail prayer was rejected, and the previously granted interim protection was vacated.

Babul Sk @ Babu Vs the State of Assam and Anr. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Gauhati HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010123472024

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB/1602/2024

¶5

BABUL SK @ BABU

¶6

S/O LT. MONSER ALI, R/O VILL- ROGHUPARA, KHARUABANDA, P.S.SOUTH SALMARA, DIST-SOUTH SALMARA, MANKACHAR, ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM

¶9

2:HAFIZUR RAHMAN S/O LT. JOMER ALI VILL- TETULTOLA (SRIRAMPARA) P.S.-SOUTH SALMARA DIST-SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN-78313

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. J AHMED, MS M DAS,MRS M DAS

¶11

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR H DAS(R-2),MS. T SOM(R-2)

¶12

Page No.# 2/3

¶13

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY

¶14

ORDER

¶15

17.09.2024

¶16

Heard Mr. J. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. M. P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶17

Notices were duly served upon the informant. The informant has engaged Ms. T. Som, learned counsel but she is not present, however, her junior namely, Ms. S. Som, learned counsel is present. She only submits that the informant is having objection to the prayer made and nothing more.

¶18

By this application under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner, namely, Babul Sk @ Babu has approached this Court seeking the benefit of pre-arrest bail, apprehending his arrest, in connection with South Salmara Police Station Case No. 50/2024 registered under Sections 447/376(3)(i)/34 of IPC read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act.

¶19

This Court vide order dated 01.08.2024 has granted interim protection to the petitioner while, calling for up-to-date case diary.

¶20

The case diary is received. Perused the case diary including the statement of the victim girl.

¶21

From the perusal of the material available on record, it is seen that the present petitioner has been identified to be one of the four accused persons involved in the offence.

¶22

Considering the nature of offence and the manner it has been committed, the prayer of the petitioner stands rejected.

¶23

Page No.# 3/3

¶24

The interim protection granted to the petitioner under its order dated 01.08.2024 stands vacated.

¶25

Accordingly, this bail application stands disposed of.

¶26

Return back the case dairy.

¶27

JUDGE

¶28

Comparing Assistant

Babul Sk @ Babu v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babul Sk @ Babu v. the State of Assam and Anr.

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

Billal Ali @ Safar Ali Vs the State of Assam

Smti. Shanti Lata Nath @ Shanti Nath and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Bikash Bucha Vs the Union of India and 3 Ors.

Sarawgi Petroleum Agency and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Abdul Audut Sarker @ Audut Sarker Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Nabadwip Shil and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.