Gauhati High Court
Mahesh Ali vs The State Of Assam on 24 June, 2021
Author: Manish Choudhury
Bench: Manish Choudhury
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010090122021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/1569/2021
MAHESH ALI
S/O OSMAN ALI
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BAGICHA KASH, PO AND PS DALGAON, DIST
DARRANG, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY PP ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR A ALI
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY
ORDER
24.06.2021 The Court proceedings have been conducted through remote video conferencing mode due to the prevailing situation in the State due to Covid-19 pandemic. Heard Mr. A. Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. T.K. Misra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent State of Assam.
Page No.# 2/3 By this application under Section 438, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), the petitioner viz. Mahesh Ali has approached this Court seeking the benefit of pre-arrest bail, apprehending his arrest, in connection with Dalgaon Police Station Case no. 242/2021, registered under Sections 120B/417/376/294/506, Indian Penal Code (IPC) read with Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. The First Information Report (FIR) was lodged on 26.04.2021. In the FIR, the informant has inter alia alleged that his minor daughter of 17 years was kidnapped on 25.02.2021 by the petitioner and thereafter, he committed rape upon her forcefully. When the victim girl said that she would disclose the incident to the informant and the villagers, the petitioner administered poison to her forcefully. The victim was recovered from a place by the village persons in an unconscious condition and was admitted in Kharupatia Hospital. Later on, the victim was taken to Mangaldai Civil Hospital and finding her condition serious, she was also taken to Guwahati Medical College and Hospital (GMCH) for better treatment. After the victim had to remain as indoor patient in the GMCH for two days and thereafter, she recovered. Though the petitioner and his father agreed to take all the responsibilities in front of the villagers for the victim's condition, they later on, denied and started intimidating the informant. When the petitioner was found absconding since the date of the incident, the FIR came to be lodged.
Mr. Ali has submitted that the FIR as regards the alleged incident dated 25.02.2021, was lodged after more than 2 (two) months i.e. on 26.04.2021 and as such, the story projected in the FIR is improbable. There was a love affair between the victim and the petitioner and they both had consumed poisonous substances. The very fact that the FIR was filed after 2 (two) months is enough Page No.# 3/3 to draw an inference that the story projected in the FIR is concocted. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has referred to the materials available in the case diary as the same is available with him. He has submitted that the victim, in her statements recorded under Section 161, CrPC and under Section 164, CrPC, had clearly implicated the petitioner for committing forceful sexual intercourse with her. As per the materials in the case diary, the victim was a minor on the date of the alleged incident. He has further submitted that the victim was admitted in the GMCH for two days as she was found to have consumed some harmful tablets.
Having considered the materials available in the case diary and the nature and gravity of the allegations made in the FIR against the petitioner and the fact that the victim had implicated the petitioner for committing forceful sexual assault upon her by the petitioner, I am of the considered view that the case in hand is not a fit case to extend the benefit of pre-arrest bail under Section 438, CrPC to the petitioner. Consequently, the application for pre-arrest bail fails and the same is rejected.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant