THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM v. THE STATE OF ASSAM & Anr.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
In terms of above, the application stands disposed of
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 34, 342, 366(A)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ss. 164, 438
Key paragraphs
- Para 99. In terms of above, the application stands disposed of.
Judgment
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. L R MAZUMDER Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN Date : 16.02.2024 ORDER Heard Mr. A.Z. Ahmed, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State respondent No. 1.
Apprehending arrest in connection with Mankachar P.S. Case No. 374/2023, under Sections 366(A)/342/34 of the IPC, this application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the applicant, namely, Akheda Begum @ Rakeda Khatun, for grant of pre-arrest bail.
It is to be noted here that the aforementioned case has been registered on the basis of an FIR lodged by one Shahinur Islam on 30.09.2023. The essence of allegation made in the FIR dated 30.09.2023, is that on that day, at about 06:40 p.m. in the evening, one Monna Aziz, Mokter Hussain, Mominur Rahman, Mofior Rahman and Rakeda Khatun kidnapped his minor daughter, namely, Smt. X. (name withheld) aged about 15 years.
Mr. Ahmed, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant had been granted the privilege of interim pre-arrest bail by this Court, vide order dated 15.12.2023 and pursuant to the said order, she had also appeared before the I.O. and she has been cooperating with the investigating agency, and therefore, it is contended to allow the application.
On the other hand, Mr. R.J. Baruah, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor submits that he has received the case diary and confirmed appearance of the applicant before the I.O. concerned, and he also submits that the I.O. has achieved substantial progress in the investigation of this case and the main accused has been arrested. However, the present applicant has been implicated Page No.# 3/3 by the victim girl in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., and as such, Mr. Baruah has opposed the application.
Having heard the submission of learned Advocates of both sides, I have gone through the application and the documents placed on record and also perused the case diary with the assistance of Mr. Baruah, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor.
The case diary indicates that the I.O. has achieved substantial progress in the investigation of the case. Though some materials are there in the statement of the victim girl recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. against the present applicant, yet it appears that she has been cooperating with the investigating agency pursuant to the order dated 15.12.2023.
In that view of the matter, custodial interrogation of the applicant seems not be warranted and therefore, the order dated 15.12.2023 is hereby made absolute with the same terms and conditions.
Operative part
In terms of above, the application stands disposed of.
Case diary be returned. JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: In terms of above, the application stands disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 34, 342, 366(A); Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — ss. 164, 438.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Gauhati High Court, on 16 Feb 2024. The bench was ROBIN PHUKAN.
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.