Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/4 vs The State Of Assam on 22 December, 2022
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010218162022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/3164/2022
KUJRAT ALI AND 3 ORS.
S/O- LT. PAGU MIA, VILL- BILASIPARA GAON, P.S. BARPETA ROAD, DIST.-
BARPETA (ASSAM)
2: HABIBAR RAHMAN
S/O- LT. TOWAJ ALI
VILL- BILASIPARA GAON
P.S. BARPETA ROAD
DIST.- BARPETA (ASSAM)
3: JULHAS ALI
S/O- AFAJ UDDIN
VILL- BILASIPARA GAON
P.S. BARPETA ROAD
DIST.- BARPETA (ASSAM)
4: JAHUR UDDIN
S/O- HUSEN ALI
VILL- BILASIPARA GAON
P.S. BARPETA ROAD
DIST.- BARPETA (ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REP. BY P.P., ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P RAHMAN
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN 22-12-2022 Heard Mr. P. Rahman, learned counsel for the applicants. Also head Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, for the State Respondent.
Apprehending arrest in connection with Barpeta Road Police Station Case No.168/2022, under Section 447/354-C/506/34 IPC, read with Section 12 of POCSO Act, 2012, this application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Prosecutor has been preferred by the applicants -(1) Kujrat Ali; (2) Habibar Rahman, (3) Julhas Ali, and (4) Jahur Uddin, for grant of pre- arrest bail.
The said case has been registered on the basis of an FIR lodged by one Hatem Ali, on 01.09.2022, to the effect that on 17.08.2022, at about 1 P.M., Habibar Rahman entered into his house with ill motive and subjected his younger daughter Smti 'X' (name withheld) aged 12 years, to sexual assault and the accused No.2 Kujrat Ali, accused No.3 Julkikkar Ali; accused No.4 Julhas Ali, and (4) Jahar Uddin, threatened his daughter to commit gang rape and also to kidnap and kill her.
Mr. Rahman, learned counsel for the applicants submit that there is 14 days delay in lodging the FIR and the explanation so forthcoming for the delay is not at all plausible and that there was dispute between the parties in respect of properties and the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case and they are local persons and ready to cooperate with the investigation of the case and, therefore, contended to allow this application.
On the other hand, Mr. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has Page No.# 3/4 produced the case diary before this Court and submits that the investigating officer has collected sufficient materials in support of the allegations made in the FIR and, therefore, Mr. Baruah opposes the application for anticipatory bail.
Having heard the learned counsel for both the sides, I have carefully gone through the documents available on record and also perused the case diary with the assistance of Mr. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor.
Considering the materials so far collected in the case diary, specially the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and also consideration the nature of accusation and the punishment prescribed for the same, this Court is inclined to grant the privilege of pre-arrest bail to applicant No.3- Julhas Ali; and applicant No.4- Jahur Uddin. And, accordingly, it is provided that in the event of arrest of the applicant No.3 - Julhas Ali and applicant No.4 - Jahur Uddin, in connection with Barpeta Road Police Station Case No.168/2022, under Section 447/354-C/506/34 IPC, read with Section 12 of POCSO Act, 2012, they shall be released on pre-arrest bail on their executing bond of Rs.20,000/- each with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority.
The above privilege is, however, subject to the following conditions:
(i) that the applicants No.3 and 4 shall make themselves available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required;
(ii) that the applicants No.3 and 4 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 applicants No.3 and 4 shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned Special Judge under the POCSO Act, Barpeta , without prior permission.
Page No.# 4/4 And having regard to the materials so far collected in the case diary against the applicant No.1- Kujrat Ali; and applicant No.2 - Habibar Rahman and also the nature and gravity of the offence and the punishment prescribed for the same, this Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of pre-arrest bail to them and, accordingly, the prayer so far it relates to applicant No.1- Kujrat Ali; and applicant No.2 - Habibar Rahman is concerned, stands rejected.
In terms of the above, this anticipatory bail application stands disposed of.
Case diary be returned.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant