Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Gauhati High Court

Md. Abul Kalam Sk vs The State Of Assam And Anr on 23 March, 2022

Author: Ajit Borthakur

Bench: Ajit Borthakur

                                                                        Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010003092021




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

                                  Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/13/2021

            MD. ABUL KALAM SK
            S/O- MD. MOKSED ALI, R/O- VILL.- SADHU BHASHA PT.-I, P.S. GOURIPUR,
            DIST.- DHUBRI, ASSAM.

            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
            REP. BY P.P., ASSAM.

            2:MD. MOKBUL HUSSAIN
             S/O- LATE ABDUR RAHMAN
             R/O- VILL.- AMERVITA CHOTO BARJANI
             P.S. AND DIST.- DHUBRI
            ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. B CHOWDHURY

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM


             Linked Case : Crl.A./6/2021

            MD. ABUL KALAM SK.

            S/O- MD. MOKSED ALI
            R/O- VILL.- SADHU BHASHA PT.-I
            P.S. GOURIPUR
            DIST.- DHUBRI
            ASSAM.


             VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
                                                                             Page No.# 2/3

           REP. BY P.P.
           ASSAM.

           2:MD. MOKBUL HUSSAIN
           S/O- LATE ABDUR RAHMAN
            R/O- VILL.- AMERVITA CHOTO BARJANI
            P.S. AND DIST.- DHUBRI
           ASSAM.
            ------------
           Advocate for : MR. B CHOWDHURY
           Advocate for : PP
           ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR


                                  BEFORE
                    HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BORTHAKUR

                                         ORDER

23.03.2022 Heard Mr. B. Chowdhury, learned counsel appearing for the applicant/appellant. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam appearing for the State respondent No.1 and Mr. A.T. Sarkar, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2.

By this interlocutory application under Section 389 Cr.P.C., the applicant/appellant, who is convicted vide the impugned Judgment and Order, dated 27.11.2020, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Dhubri in Sessions Case No. 139/2017 and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years u/s 304(B) of the IPC, has prayed for suspension of sentence and to allow him to go on bail.

The prosecution case in brief is that on 30.07.2014, the informant lodged an FIR at Athani Police outpost alleging, inter-alia, that his sister got married to the applicant/accused on 05.02.2014 by executing registered kabinnama as per social customs. After about 2 months from her marriage, the applicant/accused and his family members started torturing her by demanding dowry and also Page No.# 3/3 tried to eliminate her, in connection with which, a village meeting was also held. On the night of 29.07.2014, the applicant/accused along with his family members brutally assaulted her by confining in a room causing serious injuries which ultimately resulted in her death. However, the information of death of the victim was communicated to her younger brother over telephone at about 12 p.m. On receipt of the FIR, a case was registered vide Gauripur P.S. Case No. 602/2014 u/s 120B/304B of the IPC and after completion of investigation the charge-sheet was laid against the applicant/accused u/s 120B/304B of the IPC. Thereafter, on completion of trial, the learned Sessions Judge, Dhubri convicted and sentenced the applicant/accused as stated above.

On close scrutiny of the evidence on record including the post-mortem examination report and the grounds of the connected appeal as well as the objection filed by the State, this Court is of the opinion that if the liberty of bail is granted to the accused appellant, when the connected appeal is ready for hearing, basically on the ground of detention period, it may likely to occasion in failure of justice.

Therefore, the interlocutory application stands rejected.

Registry to list the connected appeal for hearing on its due turn.

Accordingly, the interlocutory application stands disposed of.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant