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 7, Cited by 0]

Gauhati High Court

Rabbul Huda vs The State Of Assam on 9 September, 2022

Author: Manish Choudhury

Bench: Manish Choudhury

                                                                               Page No. 1/3

GAHC010182232022




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

                                   Case No. : AB/2628/2022

            RABBUL HUDA
            S/O AMSAR ALI
            R/O VILL- SHAGUNBAHI
            P.O. AND P.S. MOIRABARI
            DIST. MORIGAON,
            PIN-782126

            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM
            REP. BY THE LEARNED PP, ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. A DEKA

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

                                    BEFORE
                   HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY

                                          ORDER

Date : 09.09.2022 Heard Mr. S. Borthakur, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent, State of Assam.

2. By this application under Section 438, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [CrPC], the petitioner viz. Rabbul Huda has approached this Court seeking the benefit of pre-arrest bail, apprehending his arrest, in connection with CID Police Station Case no. 05/2022 registered under Sections 120B/420/468/471, Indian Penal Code [IPC].

Page No. 2/3

3. The concerned crime case, CID Police Station Case no. 05/2022 has been registered on the basis of a First Information Report [FIR] lodged by the Special DGP [T&AP], Assam and Member, State Level Police Recruitment Board [SLPRB], Assam, wherein, it is inter alia alleged that during the recruitment process of constables, it has been found upon enquiry that about 414 candidates had submitted fake computer efficiency certificates from bogus and non-functional institutes. It is alleged that these candidates had adopted unfair and illegalness in the recruitment process.

4. The petitioner has projected that he was earlier a Faculty in the Department of Information and Computer Science, Dhing College and he left the job in May, 2007. The petitioner was called to appear before the Inspector, CID on 27.07.2022 and accordingly, he appeared before the said authority. According to the petitioner, he was called to verify one diploma certificate issued in favour of one Firoj Ahmed, who had submitted a diploma certificate from Dhing College during the recruitment process. Projecting that the said diploma certificate was issued to Firoj Ahmed not during the period when the petitioner was a Faculty in Dhing College, the petitioner has submitted that there is no involvement of the petitioner in any transaction of issuance of any alleged fake certificate.

4. List the case on 21.09.2020 in order to enable the learned Additional Public Prosecutor to produce the concerned case diary.

5. Having regard to the allegations made in the FIR and the projections made on behalf of the petitioner, it is provided, in the interim, that in the event of arrest of the petitioner viz. Rabbul Huda in connection with CID Police Station Case no. 05/2022, 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 :

Page No. 3/3
[i] the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer (I.O.) of the case within 10 [ten] days from today and shall cooperate with the investigation and shall thereafter, make himself available as and when his presence is required by the I.O. in the investigation of the case;
[ii] the petitioner 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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer; and [iii] the petitioner 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.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant