Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/4 vs The State Of Assam on 9 December, 2021
Author: Manish Choudhury
Bench: Manish Choudhury
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010196482021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/3894/2021
AMIR HAMJA AND 4 ORS
S/O HABIBAR RAHMAN
R/O SATRAKANARA 9 NO. SEAT,
P.S. BAGHBAR
DIST. BARPETA, ASSAM
2: JAHANGIR ALI @ JAHANGIR ALAM
S/O HABIBAR RAHMAN
R/O SATRAKANARA 9 NO. SEAT
P.S. BAGHBAR
DIST. BARPETA
ASSAM
3: BABUL ALI
S/O HABIBAR RAHMAN
R/O SATRAKANARA 9 NO. SEAT
P.S. BAGHBAR
DIST. BARPETA
ASSAM
4: HABIBAR RAHMAN
S/O LATE TAJER ALI
R/O SATRAKANARA 9 NO. SEAT
P.S. BAGHBAR
DIST. BARPETA
ASSAM
5: SALEHA KHATUN
W/O HABIBAR RAHMAN
R/O SATRAKANARA 9 NO. SEAT
Page No.# 2/4
P.S. BAGHBAR
DIST. BARPETA
ASSA
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N UDDIN
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY
ORDER
09.12.2021 Heard Mr. N. Uddin, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. B.B. Gogoi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent State of Assam.
2. By this application under Section 438, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [CrPC], the petitioners viz. [1] Amir Hamja, [2] Jahangir Ali @ Jahangir Alam, [2] Babul Ali, [4] Habibar Rahman, and [5] Saleha Khatun have approached this Court seeking the benefit of pre-arrest bail, apprehending their arrest, in connection with Baghbar Police Station Case no. 398/2021, registered under Sections 120B/498A/354A/376/511/325, Indian Penal Code [IPC].
3. In the First Information Report [FIR], lodged on 08.11.2021, the informant has named the present five petitioners as accused. The petitioner no. 1 is the husband of the informant whereas the petitioner no. 2 and the petitioner no. 3 are the brothers-in-law of the informant. The petitioner no. 4 and the petitioner no. 5 are the father-in-law and the mother-in-law of the informant respectively.
4. In the FIR, the informant has inter alia alleged that the marriage was solemnized between her and the petitioner no. 1 about 3 ½ months before. After the marriage, the in-laws of the informant used to ill-treat her both physically and mentally. A specific allegation has been made against the petitioner no. 4 i.e. the father-in-law of the informant to the effect that he often tried to sexually assault her and an Page No.# 3/4 incident of 06.08.2021 was referred to that effect in the FIR. It has been alleged that the informant was driven out of the matrimonial house by the accused persons with a demand of dowry of Rs. 1,00,000/-.
5. Mr. Uddin, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners never misbehaved the informant. It is the informant who is of quarrelsome nature and is not interested to live in the joint family set-up.
6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the concerned case diary and submitted that the informant has made certain allegations against the petitioner no. 4 in her statement recorded under Section 161, CrPC.
7. I have perused the materials available in the case diary, collected during the course of investigation carried out so far.
8. On such perusal, it is found that the independent witnesses have mentioned that the informant used to quarrel with the female members in the in-laws family. Allegation against the petitioner no. 4 is to the effect that he often give obscene gestures to the informant.
9. This Court on 24.11.2021 while calling for the case diary, had provided interim protection to the petitioner nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5 and they have appeared before the I.O. and got their statements recorded, which are available in the case diary.
10. Having regard to the materials available in the case diary, collected during the investigation carried out so far, this Court is of the considered view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners for the purpose of carrying out further investigation into the case is not necessary and their release on pre-arrest bail, at this stage of investigation, is not likely to cause any prejudicial effect in the further investigation of the case, provided they to extend their assistance and co-operation in the further investigation of the case.
11. Accordingly, the interim protection granted to the petitioner nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5 by order dated 24.11.2011 is hereby made absolute. In so far as the petitioner no. 4 is concerned, it is provided that in the event of arrest of the petitioner no. 4 viz. Habibar Rahman in connection with Baghbar Police Station Case no. 398/2021, he shall be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with one local surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the arresting authority, subject to the conditions that :
[i] the petitioner no. 4 shall appear before the I.O. of the case within 10 [ten] days from today;
Page No.# 4/4 [ii] all the petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation and make themselves available for interrogation whenever required by the I.O. of the case;
[iii] all the petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any witness acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer; [iv] all the petitioners shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police; [v] all the petitioners shall maintain law and order and he shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or of the commission of which they are suspected;
The bail application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant