Gauhati High Court
Abul Kashem vs The State Of Assam on 17 November, 2021
Author: Ajit Borthakur
Bench: Ajit Borthakur
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010180502021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/3586/2021
ABUL KASHEM
S/O MOFIZ UDDIN, R/O VILL. BALARCHAR PT-III, P.S. MERER CHAR, DIST.
BONGAIGAON, ASSAM.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY PP, ASSAM.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H R A CHOUDHURY
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BORTHAKUR
ORDER
17.11.2021 Heard Mr. H.R.A. Choudhury, learned Sr. counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam appearing for the State respondent.
This second petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C., is filed for granting the Page No.# 2/3 privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, namely Abul Kashem apprehending arrest in connection with Mererchar P.S. Case No. 76/2021 u/s 120B/498A/313/302/201/506/34 of the IPC.
The Case diary, as called for, is placed before the Court.
The earlier pre-arrest bail application of the petitioner was rejected by this Court vide order, dated 26.08.2021 passed in A.B. No. 2260/2021.
The F.I.R. reveals the allegation that the informant had been subjected to mental and physical torture since after her marriage with the petitioner. During the informant's first pregnancy of 6 months, the petitioner damaged the child by administering medicine. Thereafter, she gave birth to a male child. It is alleged that on 24.06.2021, when the informant was sleeping due to fever, the FIR named accused Nos. 4 and 5, namely Sahera Khatun and Fatema Khatun in conspiracy with the petitioner, killed her 3 years old child namely, Mojibul Hoque and threw him into a pond along with a ball. Later on, when the villagers recovered the dead body of Mojibul and examined him by shaking his head, blood, rice and foam came out of his mouth instead of water. It is further alleged that the FIR named accused Nos. 2 and 3 physically tortured and threatened the informant.
The PM report shows that the cause of death of the deceased was due to asphyxia as a result of antemortem drowning.
The case diary reveals that there was no eye witness to the alleged occurrence.
In the backdrop of facts and attending circumstances as emerge from the case diary, this Court finds that custodial interrogation of the petitioner in the interest of the ongoing investigation is not necessary.
Page No.# 3/3 Accordingly, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the petitioner, named above, shall be released on pre-arrest bail, in connection with the above noted case on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority, subject, of course, to the following conditions:
(i) That the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 15 days from the date of this order, failing which, on the 16 th day, this pre-arrest bail order shall automatically come to an end;
(ii) That the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise 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; and
(iii) That the petitioner shall refrain from committing any cruelty on his wife.
Return the case diary.
This disposes of the anticipatory bail application.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant