✦ Gauhati High Court · 03 May 2023

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM & Anr. v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

Ab No. 1539 of 2023AJIT BORTHAKUR2 min read

Case at a glance

Judgment

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M R KHANDAKAR Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BORTHAKUR Date : 03.05.2023 ORDER Heard Mr. M. R. Khandakar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also Heard Mr. R. J. Baruah, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam appearing for the State respondent. This petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C., is filed for granting the privilege of pre- arrest bail to the petitioners, namely, 1. Atiqur Islam @ Atiqul Islam, 2. Abdur Rahman Sheikh, apprehending arrest in connection with Sukchar P.S. Case No. Page No.# 2/2 61/2023 registered u/s 9/10/11 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act r/w Sections 6/17 of POCSO Act (G.R. No. 183/2023). The matter relates to allegation of child marriage and marital sexual intercourse. Perusal of the petition and the documents annexed therewith, it is seen that the date of birth of the victim is 03.11.2006 and the marriage was solemnized on

31.12.2022 and at the time of her marriage, the age of the victim woman was approximately 16 years 1 months. Considering entire aspects of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that custodial interrogation of the petitioners may not be necessary in the interest of investigation in the case. Accordingly, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the petitioners, named above, shall be released on pre-arrest bail, in connection with the above noted case on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 30,000/- each with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority, subject, of course, to the following conditions: (i) That the petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 7 days, failing which on and from the 8th day, this pre-arrest bail order shall have no force; and (ii) That the petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation; and (iii) That the petitioners 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. This disposes off the anticipatory bail application. JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Questions this judgment answers

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438; Prohibition of Child Marriage Act — ss. 9, 10, 11; Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — ss. 6, 17.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Gauhati High Court, on 03 May 2023. The bench was AJIT BORTHAKUR.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Gauhati High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Ab No. 1539 of 2023). ← Search more judgments