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 0, Cited by 0]

Gauhati High Court

Saneka Parvin vs The State Of Assam And Ors on 4 February, 2025

Author: Parthivjyoti Saikia

Bench: Parthivjyoti Saikia

                                                                      Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010014492025




                                                               undefined

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

                           Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/66/2025

         SANEKA PARVIN
         W/O HAF H. RAHMAN 952TPT COY ASE, C/O 99 APO, PIN - 905952, VILL -
         SURUN, P.O. - PARAHARIPUR, P.S. - ITAHAR, DIST - UTTAR DINAJPUR,
         WEST BENGAL, PIN - 733143



         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS
         REP BY THE PP ASSAM

         2:MUNENDRA KUMAR
          S/O PRITAM SINGH
          P/R/A UNIT 822 (FD WKSP COY EME) JAMMU AND KASHMIR (PATTAN)
          PIN-906822. PERMANENT ADD- VILL- SALEMPUR
          P.O.-SALEMPUR
          DIST- BULAND SAHAR
          STATE- UTTAR PRADESH
          PIN-203001

         3:CHAUDHARI RAMESH KUMAR VELA BHAI
          S/O CHAUDHARI VELA BHAI
          P/R/A 526 ASC BN A-COMPANY I - PALATOON
          C/O 56 APO
          PIN-905526
          CITY - JAMMU
          STATE - JAMMU AND KASHMIR
          PERMANENT ADD - VILL- SALIMGADH
         TEHSIL - KANKREJ
          DIST - BANASKANTHA
          P.O. - TERVADA
          P.S. - TERVADA
          PIN - 385320
                                                                       Page No.# 2/4

             STATE - GUJRA

Advocate for the Petitioner   : NEKIBUR ZAMAN CHOUDHURY, MR. A R BHUYAN,,

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,




             Linked Case : Crl.Pet./816/2024

            MUNENDRA KUMAR AND ANR
            S/O PRITAM SINGH
            P/R/A UNIT 822 (FD WKSP COY EME) JAMMU AND KASHMIR (PATTAN)
            PIN-906822. PERMANENT ADD- VILL- SALEMPUR
            P.O.-SALEMPUR
            DIST- BULAND SAHAR
            STATE- UTTAR PRADESH
            PIN-203001

            2: CHAUDHARI RAMESH KUMAR VELA BHAI
            S/O CHAUDHARI VELA BHAI
             P/R/A 526 ASC BN A-COMPANY I - PALATOON
             C/O 56 APO
             PIN-905526
             CITY - JAMMU
             STATE - JAMMU AND KASHMIR
             PERMANENT ADD - VILL- SALIMGADH
            TEHSIL - KANKREJ
             DIST - BANASKANTHA
             P.O. - TERVADA
             P.S. - TERVADA
             PIN - 385320
             STATE - GUJRAT
            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
            REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
            ASSAM

            2:SANEKA PARVIN
            W/O HAF H. RAHMAN 952TPT COY ASE
             C/O 99 APO
             PIN - 905952
            VILL - SURUN
             P.O. - PARAHARIPUR
                                                                                          Page No.# 3/4

             P.S. - ITAHAR
             DIST - UTTAR DINAJPUR
             WEST BENGAL
             PIN - 733143
             ------------

Advocate for : MR. ANANTA RAM MEDHI Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA 04/02/2025 Heard Mr. A R Bhuyan, the learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. D. P. Goswami, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the State.

2. This application has been filed praying for modification/rectification of the order dated 17.12.2024 passed by this Court in Crl. Pet. No. 816/2024.

3. In para-5 of the said order, it is mentioned that Mr. Borah, appearing for the said woman submits that she has no objection if the criminal proceeding against the petitioners is quashed.

4. Mr. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the applicant submits that it was not Mr. Bora, rather it was Ms. Bora.

5. Mr. Bhuyan, further submits that Ms. Bora is his colleague and she did not have sufficient experience in legal practice. Therefore, she might have made the mistake by stating the said thing before this Court.

6. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides.

7. The statement of Ms. Bora was recorded by this Court as it was. Therefore, there is no error to be corrected.

Page No.# 4/4

8. This Court is of the opinion that the present I.A. does not have any merit and stands disposed of accordingly.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant