Disposed

Fokhoruddin Ali Ahmed v. Akbar Ali

Gauhati HC10 Mar 2026Crl.Rev.P./117/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A 60-year-old accused unable to attend trial court due to medical problems sought relief from a bailable warrant in an NICR case. The High Court set aside the warrant and directed the trial court to allow him to appear and contest the case via video conferencing.

What did the court decide?

Bailable Warrant of Arrest set aside; trial court directed to permit appearance and contesting of case via video conferencing.

Fokhoruddin Ali Ahmed Vs Akbar Ali — Bail and Remand | Gauhati HC (2026)

Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010046482026

undefined

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

¶5

Case No. : Crl.Rev.P./117/2026

¶6

FOKHORUDDIN ALI AHMED

¶7

S/O. LATE INTAZUDDIN AHMED, PERMANENT RESIDENT OF VILLAGE WARD NO. 2, BORTALOWA, P.O. DHALIGAON, P.S. KAJALGAON, CHIRANG, PIN 783385, ASSAM, AND PRESENTLY RESIDING AT FLAT 1C, EUREKA ASHIYANA, BISHNU RABHA PATH, BELTOLA, P.S. BASISTHA, GUWAHATI781028, KAMRUP (M), ASSAM

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

AKBAR ALI

¶10

SON OF LATE MOHAMMAD ALI RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BORTALOWA, P.ODHALIGAON, P.SKAJOLGAON,IN THE DISTRICT OF BONGAIGAON,ASSAM, PIN 783385.

¶11

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S S S RAHMAN, MR. M R SODIAL,MS G SARMAH

¶12

Advocate for the Respondent : ,

¶13

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA

¶14

ORDER

¶15

Date : 11.03.2026

¶16

Heard Mr. S S S Rahman, the learned counsel the appearing for the petitioner.

¶17

This is an application under Section 438 read with Section 442 of the BNSS, 2023

¶18

Page No.# 2/2

¶19

in respect of N. I. C. R. Case No.02/2025 pending in the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chirang.

¶20

The petitioner Fokhoruddin Ali Ahmed, who is aged about 60 years, is an accused before the court below. Because of medical problems, he could not appear before the trial court when summons was issued to him. Therefore, the trial court issued Bailable Warrant of Arrest of ₹5,000/- against him.

¶21

Mr. Rahman submits that because of his health condition, the petitioner was unable to regularly attend the trial court. The learned counsel further submits that the petitioner may be given the opportunity to appear before the trial court through Video Conferencing.

¶22

I have considered the submissions made by Rahman. I have also gone through the documents available in the record.

¶23

This Court is of the opinion that the prayer of the petitioner deserves to be accepted at this stage.

¶24

Therefore, the order directing issue of Bailable Warrant of Arrest against the present petitioner is set aside.

¶25

The trial court is directed to provide the opportunity to the petitioner to appear through Video Conferencing and to contest the case.

¶26

With the aforesaid direction, the criminal petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶27

JUDGE

¶28

Comparing Assistant

Fokhoruddin Ali Ahmed v. Akbar Ali

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Fokhoruddin Ali Ahmed v. Akbar Ali

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

MD Mohibul Hoque Vs the State of Assam

Jeherul Hoque Vs the State of Assam

Barkat Ali Vs the State of Assam

Selim Ahmed Salim Ahmed Vs the State of Assam

Ajit Das Alias Ashit Das Vs the State of Assam

MD Dilbar Hussain Laskar Alias Dilwar Hussain Laskar Vs the State of Assam