Gauhati High Court
Hafizur Rahman @ Habijul Rahman vs The State Of Assam on 9 December, 2019
Author: Ajai Lamba
Bench: Ajai Lamba
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010302792019
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln. 3940/2019
1:HAFIZUR RAHMAN @ HABIJUL RAHMAN
S/O HAZRAT ALI, R/O- VILL. BHATIPETLA, P.S. TAMARHAT,
DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM.
VERSUS
1:THE STATE OF ASSAM
REP. BY PP, ASSAM.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A RAHMAN
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
-BEFORE-
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AJAI LAMBA
ORDER
Date : 09-12-2019 Hafizur Rahman @ Habijul Rahman has preferred this petition for bail under Section 439 Cr.PC in Special Case No.70/2019 (arising out of Tamarhat Police Station Case No.89/2019 under Sections 448/376/313/341 IPC read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012).
2. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that because the 2(two) main witnesses have already been examined, the petitioner is entitled to the concession of bail.
3. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam has opposed the application for bail on the ground that the prosecutrix has been examined as PW-1 in camera and has clearly Page No.# 2/2 stated in unequivocal terms that she was 15(fifteen) years of age when she was subjected to statutory rape by the petitioner. Further contention of learned Additional Public Prosecutor is that the petitioner claimed to be a juvenile before the Lower Court on the basis of a birth certificate, which on verification was found to be forged.
4. I have gone through the statement of the prosecutrix/victim available on record as Annexure-3. The prosecutrix has stated that she was 15(fifteen) years of age and had an affair with the accused. The accused promised to get married to the victim and on that pretext had physical relations with her. The prosecutrix became pregnant and gave birth to a male child. The accused, however, refused to get married to her.
5. From the statement it becomes clearly evident that a minor girl has been subjected to rape by the petitioner.
6. So far as conduct of the petitioner is concerned, I have referred to order dated 05.09.2019 passed by Special Judge, Dhubri. In the said order, it has been noticed that the petitioner claimed juvenility on the basis of a birth certificate, which on verification was found to be forged.
7. Considering the nature of the offence and conduct of the petitioner in relying on a forged document while pleading his case, I find no ground to grant bail to the petitioner.
8. In view of the above, the bail application is dismissed.
CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant