Yusub Ali Mazumder And 3 Ors vs The State Of Assam on 10 June, 2020

[Cites 8, Cited by 0]

Gauhati High Court

Yusub Ali Mazumder And 3 Ors vs The State Of Assam on 10 June, 2020

Bench: Manish Choudhury

                                                                            Page No. 1/3

GAHC010070372020




                              THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
   (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
                                   Case No. : AB 1122/2020

            1:YUSUB ALI MAZUMDER AND 3 ORS.
            S/O KURSHED ALI MAZUMDER @ MONDAL MIA. VILL- KUCHILA GRANT,
            PS AND DIST- HAILAKANDI, ASSAM

            2: ALIM UDDIN MAZUMDER
             S/O KURSHED ALI MAZUMDER @ MONDAL MIA. VILL- KUCHILA GRANT
             PS AND DIST- HAILAKANDI
            ASSAM

            3: AZIR UDDIN MAZUMDER
             S/O KURSHED ALI MAZUMDER @ MONDAL MIA. VILL- KUCHILA GRANT
             PS AND DIST- HAILAKANDI
            ASSAM

            4: ZIABUR RAHMAN MAZUMDER
             S/O - YUSUB ALI MAZUMDER. VILL- KUCHILA GRANT
             PS AND DIST- HAILAKANDI
            ASSAM
            VERSUS
            1:THE STATE OF ASSAM
            REP BY PP ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. S MUNIR
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

                                     BEFORE
                    HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY
                                           ORDER

Date : 10-06-2020 Heard Mr. S. Munir, learned counsel for the accused-petitioners and Ms. S. Jahan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.

Page No. 2/3

By this application under Section 438, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), the accused-petitioners viz. 1) Yusub Ali Mazumder, 2) Alim Uddin Mazumder, 3) Azir Uddin Mazumder & 4) Ziabur Rahman Mazumder have prayed for pre-arrest bail, apprehending their arrest, in connection with Halikandi Police Station Case no. 294/2020 (corresponding G.R. Case no. 707/2020), registered under Sections 342/302/34, Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The accused-petitioners are named as accused no. 3, accused no. 4, accused no. 5 and accused no. 6 respectively in the First Information Report (FIR) lodged on 07.04.2020. In the FIR, the informant has, inter alia, alleged that the son of the informant, at about 7-30 p.m. on 06.04.2020, had gone out of the house. It is alleged that the accused persons, 6 (six) in numbers, out of their previous grudge brought her son to their house by calling him through the accused no. 1 viz. Muslima Begum Mazumder. When her son went to the house, they confined him in their house and thereafter, the accused no. 2 had administered poison to him by mixing it in a glass of water. After return, her son collapsed in his house. Thereafter, he was taken to the Hospital and he succumbed to death at about 7-00 p.m. on 07.04.2020 at S.K. Roy Civil Hospital, Hailakandi.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the case diary. From the materials available in the case diary, it transpires that the doctor after conducting post-mortem examination had opined that the death of the deceased was due to cardio-respiratory failure as a result of ingestion of organo phosphorus pesticide. Viscera has been sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) and the report is yet to be received by the Investigating Officer (I.O.) of the case.

It is found that the accused no. 3 i.e. the accused-petitioner no. 1 had earlier lodged an FIR against the deceased on 28.06.2019 wherein he had alleged that the deceased had abducted the accused no. 1 on 27.06.2019 along with her child. It further appears that after the said incident of the alleged abduction, the deceased and accused no. 1 had stayed in Hyderabad for a period of about 8 months. The said FIR dated 28.06.2019 was registered as Hailakandi Police Station Case no. 673/2019 for offences under Sections 366/334, IPC.

The materials available in the case diary, collected during the course of investigation carried out so far, have not specifically identified the present accused-petitioners behind the act of administering poison to the deceased. The investigation is still in progress. However, considering the materials available in the case diary, I am of the considered view that the Page No. 3/3 benefit of pre-arrest bail under Section 438, CrPC can be extended to the accused-petitioners provided that they extend their full co-operation in the further investigation of the case by joining the investigation and their release on bail, at this stage of investigation, are not likely to be prejudicially affected the further investigation of the case in any pre-judicial manner.

Accordingly, it is provided that in the event of their arrest in connection with Halikandi Police Station Case no. 294/2020, the accused-petitioners shall be released on bail, on their furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- each with one suitable surety each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the arresting authority, on the following conditions :-

1) The accused-petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer of the case within 10 (ten) days from today and thereafter, they shall appear as and when their presence is required for the further investigation of the case;

2) The accused-petitioners shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the aforesaid police station, without prior written permission from its Officer In-Charge;

3) The accused-petitioners shall not hamper with the investigation, or tamper with the evidence of the case; &

4) The accused-petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or premise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer.

The bail application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Return the case diary.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Gauhati High Court