Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 21641 (GAU)

HAZARAT ALI @ HAJARAT ALI SHEIKH v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

AB/3255/2024 · 2025-01-07

Parthivjyoti Saikia

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010264032024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/3255/2024 HAZARAT ALI @ HAJARAT ALI SHEIKH S/O BAHALUDDIN SHEIKH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SUKHATIKHATA, PS GAURIPUR, DIST DHUBRI, ASSAM 2: NAJUL UDDIN SK @ NAZOL UDDIN SK @ NAJALUDDIN SHEIKH S/O ALE SHEIKH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SUKHATIKHATA PS GAURIPUR DIST DHUBRI ASSAM 3: ROMISA KHATUN @ RAMISHA KHATUN W/O NURAL HOQUE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SUKHATIKHATA PS GAURIPUR DIST DHUBRI ASSAM 4: NUR BHANU KHATUN @ NARABANU BIBI W/O SAIDUR RAHMAN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SUKHATIKHATA PS GAURIPUR DIST DHUBRI ASSAM 5: AYNAL HOQUE @ MONOWAR ALI S/O KHAJALUDDIN SHEIKH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SUKHATIKHATA PS GAURIPUR DIST DHUBRI ASSA Page No.# 2/4 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MD A RAHMAN, A W AMAN,SAMIM RAHMAN,MR. SURAJIT DAS,A S CHOUDHURY,MR SARFRAZ NAWAZ Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MD. MEMON AHMED (FOR INFORMANT),MS F N ZAMAN (FOR INFORMANT),MS. R CHOUDHURY (FOR INFORMANT) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA ORDER 08.01.2025 Heard Mr. S. Nawaz, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. R. R. Kaushik, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State respondent No.1 and Ms. R. Choudhury, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2. This is an application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C., praying for pre-arrest bail by the petitioners, namely, (1) Hazarat Ali @ Hajarat Ali Sheikh (2) Najul Uddin Sk @ Nazol Uddin Sk @ Najaluddin Sheikh and (3) Romisa Khatun @ Ramisha Khatun in connection with Gauripur Case No. 294/2024, registered under Section 61(2)/103(1) of BNS. The informant has alleged in the FIR that after ten years of marriage of his daughter, her husband and his family members used to harass her Page No.# 3/4 physically and mentally. According to the informant, on the day of occurrence, all of them gagged her mouth with a pillow and after killing her kept her dead body hanging. It may be stated that the husband of the deceased lady has already arrested by police. Ms. Choudhury, learned counsel for the informant has submitted that on previous occasions also the deceased lady was tortured physically and mentally by his husband and his family members. According to Ms. Choudhjry, on one such occasion, there was an understanding between the parties and pursuant to that understanding she had returned to her matrimonial home. She further submitted that if she did not return to her matrimonial home, she would not have been killed. On the other hand, Mr. Kaushik has produced the case diary and submitted that the cause of death of the deceased was asphyxia due to anti mortem hanging which is suicidal in nature. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. These petitioners are the parents-in-law of the deceased and others are the close relatives of the family and the husband has already been arrested by police. Considering the facts as well as the materials available thereon, this Courts finds that custodial interrogation of the petitioners are not required for the purpose of investigation of the case. Therefore, they may be granted the privilege of pre-arrest bail. 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 Page No.# 4/4 above noted case on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/-each with a suitable surety of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the arresting authority. The direction for pre-arrest bail is subject to the conditions that the petitioners: (a) shall appear before the Investigating Police Officer within ten days from today and shall co-operate with the investigation; (b) 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. The anticipatory bail application stands disposed of. Return the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant