Allowed

Mainul Hosen v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC12 May 2024AB/894/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court converted an interim pre-arrest bail order into absolute bail under Section 438 CrPC for the petitioner charged under Sections 417, 313, and 376 IPC, directing cooperation with the investigation and no threats against the victim.

What did the court decide?

The interim pre-arrest bail order dated 05.04.2024 is made absolute with a direction to cooperate with the investigation and not to threaten the victim.

Mainul Hosen Vs the State of Assam — Cheating and Forgery | Gauhati HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010068182024

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : AB/894/2024

¶5

MAINUL HOSEN

¶6

S/O BANDE ALI, VILL- KAIMATI, P.S.-GOLAKGANJ, DIST- DHUBRI, ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM

¶9

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N UDDIN

¶10

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶11

Page No.# 2/3

¶12

BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER

¶13

13.05.2024

¶14

Heard Mr. N. Uddin, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. P. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent.

¶15

This is an application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying for grant of pre-arrest bail to the accused/petitioner, who has been apprehending arrest in connection with Golakganj P.S. Case No. 441/2023, under Sections 417/313/376 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Uddin, that after obtaining the interim pre-arrest bail, the petitioner appeared before the I.O. and cooperated in the investigation of this case. More so, as he has already co-operated with the I.O. and also considering the nature of offence, his custodial interrogation is not at all necessary in this case and accordingly, it is prayed to make the interim pre-arrest bail order absolute.

¶17

In this context, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr. P. Sharma, has submitted that considering the materials available in the Case Diary and the conduct of the accused/petitioner, the prayer of the accused/petitioner may be considered. However, there is an allegation against the accused/petitioner regarding threatening the victim as well as her family members.

¶18

After hearing the submissions made by the learned counsels of both sides and also considering the entire aspects of the case, nature of allegation as well as the conduct of the accused/petitioner, I find it a fit case to extend the privilege of prearrest bail to the accused/petitioner. Accordingly, the interim pre-arrest bail order,

¶19

Page No.# 3/3

¶20

granted to the accused/petitioner vide order dated 05.04.2024, is hereby made absolute with a direction to the accused/petitioner to co-operate with the I.O. in further investigation of the case. Along with that, the accused/petitioner is also hereby directed not to threaten the victim as well as her family members.

¶21

In terms of above, this anticipatory bail application stands disposed of.

¶22

JUDGE

¶23

Comparing Assistant

Mainul Hosen v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mainul Hosen 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

Farook Jahan Ahmed @ Faruk Jahan (Milton) and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Assam

Golap Ali @ Golap Hussain Vs the State of Assam

Uma Kanta Chetia and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Rakesh Taye Vs the State of Assam

Chan Miah Sheikh Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Amar Deka Vs the State of Assam