The Gauhati High Court granted pre-arrest bail to accused petitioners in a land dispute case involving IPC 307/34. The Court found custodial interrogation unnecessary and directed appearance within one week.
Pre-arrest bail granted to further accused on bond of Rs. 20,000 each with one surety, subject to conditions of appearance and cooperation.
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.# 1/4
GAHC010049172024
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/627/2024
MOTIAR RAHMAN AND 2 ORS.
S/O LATE ABDUL GANI, R/O VILL- MONAKOCHA, P.S.-KALGACHIA, DISTBARPETA, ASSAM
2: HALIMA KHATUN W/O MOTIAR RAHMAN R/O VILL- MONAKOCHA P.S.-KALGACHIA DIST- BARPETA ASSAM
3: ISAHAQUE ALI S/O LATE SAYED ALI R/O VILL- HALDIA GAON P.S.-KALGACHAI DIST- BARPETA ASSA
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MD. I HUSSAIN
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
Page No.# 2/4
BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA
ORDER
Date : 04.04.2024
Heard Mr. I. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. R. R. Kaushik, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent.
This is an application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of pre-arrest bail to the accused/petitioners, who are apprehending arrest in connection with Kalgachia P.S. Case No. 04/2024, corresponding to G.R. No. 32/2024, under Section 447/323/326/307/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Case Diary has been received. Perused the same. Heard both sides.
It is submitted by Mr. I. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioners, that it is a fact that there was an altercation and quarrel took place between 2 (two) groups due to some land dispute and the members of both the groups sustained some injuries out of that scuffle. But no such incident had happened and the accused/petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. The petitioners’ side also lodged a counter F.I.R. against the informant and other members and that has also been registered and the case is at the stage of investigation. However, the accused/petitioners are ready and willing to cooperate with the I.O. in the further investigation of this case if they are granted
Page No.# 3/4
with the privilege of pre-arrest bail. He further submitted that considering the allegation made in the F.I.R., custodial interrogation of the present accused/petitioner is not required in the present case. They are the permanent resident of their addressed locality and will appear before the I.O. as and when their presence will be required.
In this content, Mr. R. R. Kaushik, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, has submitted that from the materials available in the Case Diary, it is seen that the quarrel took place between 2 (two) groups due to land dispute and one of the victim also sustained serious injury due to assault by the blunt object and other victim sustained minor injuries. However, considering the materials available in the Case Diary and the nature of offence, the accused/petitioners may be granted with the privilege of interim pre-arrest bail.
After hearing the submissions of learned counsels for both sides and also considering the nature of offence as well as the injury report submitted by the I.O. along with the Case Diary, I find that custodial interrogation of the present accused/ petitioners is not necessary in this case and therefore, I find it a fit case to extend the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the accused/petitioners.
Accordingly, it is provided that in the event of arrest of the accused/petitioners, namely, (i) Motiar Rahman, (ii) Halima Khatun & (iii) Isahaque Ali, in connection with Kalgachia P.S. Case No. 04/2024, corresponding to G.R. No. 32/2024, under Section 447/323/326/307/34 of the Indian Penal Code, they shall be enlarged on pre-arrest bail on their executing a bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) only each with one surety of like amount to
Page No.# 4/4
the satisfaction of the arresting authority, subject to the following conditions:
The anticipatory bail application stands disposed of in terms above.
The Case Diary be sent back.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioners are eligible for pre-arrest bail under Section 438 CrPC in a case involving a land dispute with minor and serious injuries.
Whether custodial interrogation is necessary for the accused/petitioners in the present case.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Motiar Rahman
Halima Khatun
Ishaque Ali
State of Assam
Mitali Thakuria
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
