Dismissed

Khushket Ali v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Gauhati HC19 Jan 2025AB/3125/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail application under Section 482(1) BNSS by a man accused of raping a woman at her home, with POCSO charges. The court found prima facie complicity and serious allegations warranting possible custodial interrogation, and dismissed the application.

What the court decided

AI extract

Khushket Ali Vs the State of Assam and Anr. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Gauhati HC (2025)

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010246432024

2025:GAU-AS:478

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

¶5

Case No. : AB/3125/2024

¶6

KHUSHKET ALI S/O JAHOR ALI R/O NO. 5, BARUAJHAR P.S. DALGAON DIST. DARRANG, ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶9

2:XXXX D/O LATE A BDUL KHALEK C/O SAHAR BHANU (MOTHER) R/O BARUAJHAR P.S. DALGAON DIST. DARRANG ASSA

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D K BAGCHI,

¶11

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. A PHUKAN, Amicus Curiac, (R-2)

¶12

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Date : 20.01.2025

¶15

Heard Mr. D.K. Bagchi, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. M.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent No. 1.

¶16

Page No.# 2/3

¶17

Mr. Arunav Phukan, learned Amicus Curiae for the respondent No. 2, is absent today also. Accordingly, Ms. P. Das, learned counsel is appointed as Amicus Curiae to represent the respondent No. 2 and accordingly, I heard Ms. Das.

¶18

Apprehending arrest in connection with Dalgaon P.S. Case No. 213/2024, under Sections 75/329(4)/64(1) of the BNS, read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act, this application under Section 482(1), BNSS is preferred by applicant, namely, Khushket Ali, for grant of pre-arrest bail.

¶19

It is to be noted here that the aforementioned case has been registered on the basis of an FIR lodged by one, Smt. X, (name withheld) on 17.10.2024. The essence of allegation against the present applicant is that on 17.10.2024, at about 1 a.m., he entered into the house of the victim-cum-informant and committed rape upon her by pressing her mouth with clothes.

¶20

Mr. Bagchi, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and no way involved with the offence alleged in the FIR, and that there was relationship between the victim and the applicant, and that the victim on 08.11.2024, at about 3 p.m., came to the house of the applicant with a view to marry and stay with him and that she was pressurized by her elder brother, namely, Saher Ali to lodge the FIR, and that the applicant is ready to cooperate with the investigating agency and therefore, it is contended to allow the application.

¶21

On the other hand, Mr. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the case diary before this Court and submits that the I.O. has collected sufficient incriminating materials against the applicant in connection with the allegation made in the FIR, and therefore, Mr. Sarma has opposed the application.

¶22

Page No.# 3/3

¶23

Ms. Das, learned Amicus Curiae for the respondent No. 2 submits that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature and therefore, she has opposed the application.

¶24

Having heard the submissions of learned Advocates of both sides, I have carefully gone through the application and the documents placed on record and also perused the case diary with the assistance of Mr. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

¶25

The case diary indicates prima facie materials to show complicity of the applicant with the offence alleged in the FIR, and the allegations are undoubtedly serious in nature and at this stage, it cannot be said that his custodial interrogation is not warranted in the interest of investigation. Though, Mr. Bagchi, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim-cuminformant herself went to the house of the applicant on 08.11.2024, yet, it appears that the main occurrence took place on 17.10.2024, at about 1 a.m. in the house of the victim. The subsequent event of visiting the house of the applicant by the victim-cum-informant no way dilutes the gravity of the incident that took place on 17.10.2024.

¶26

Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is of the view that this is not a fit case where the privilege of pre-arrest bail can be granted to the applicant and accordingly, this application stands dismissed.

¶27

Case diary be returned.

¶28

JUDGE

¶29

Comparing Assistant

Khushket Ali v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Khushket Ali v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Sayad Jamal @ Surajmal @ Saidur Ali and 4 Ors. F

Himakshi Choudhury Vs Bhrigujit Choudhury (Sonti)

Hiranya Prova Aideo Vs Durga Das Banerjee and 3 Ors.

MD Nijam Uddin Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Shahidul Hoque Vs the State of Assam

Himangshu Baishya and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and Anr.