Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 4222 (GAU)

FOKHORUDDIN ALI AHMED v. AKBAR ALI

Crl.Rev.P./117/2026 · 2026-03-10

Parthivjyoti Saikia

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010046482026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Rev.P./117/2026 FOKHORUDDIN ALI AHMED S/O. LATE INTAZUDDIN AHMED, PERMANENT RESIDENT OF VILLAGE WARD NO. 2, BORTALOWA, P.O. DHALIGAON, P.S. KAJALGAON, CHIRANG, PIN 783385, ASSAM, AND PRESENTLY RESIDING AT FLAT 1C, EUREKA ASHIYANA, BISHNU RABHA PATH, BELTOLA, P.S. BASISTHA, GUWAHATI- 781028, KAMRUP (M), ASSAM VERSUS AKBAR ALI SON OF LATE MOHAMMAD ALI RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BORTALOWA, P.O- DHALIGAON, P.SKAJOLGAON,IN THE DISTRICT OF BONGAIGAON,ASSAM, PIN 783385. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S S S RAHMAN, MR. M R SODIAL,MS G SARMAH Advocate for the Respondent : , BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA ORDER Date : 11.03.2026 Heard Mr. S S S Rahman, the learned counsel the appearing for the petitioner. 2. This is an application under Section 438 read with Section 442 of the BNSS, 2023 Page No.# 2/2 in respect of N. I. C. R. Case No.02/2025 pending in the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chirang. 3. The petitioner Fokhoruddin Ali Ahmed, who is aged about 60 years, is an accused before the court below. Because of medical problems, he could not appear before the trial court when summons was issued to him. Therefore, the trial court issued Bailable Warrant of Arrest of ₹5,000/- against him. 4. Mr. Rahman submits that because of his health condition, the petitioner was unable to regularly attend the trial court. The learned counsel further submits that the petitioner may be given the opportunity to appear before the trial court through Video Conferencing. 5. I have considered the submissions made by Rahman. I have also gone through the documents available in the record. 6. This Court is of the opinion that the prayer of the petitioner deserves to be accepted at this stage. 7. Therefore, the order directing issue of Bailable Warrant of Arrest against the present petitioner is set aside. 8. The trial court is directed to provide the opportunity to the petitioner to appear through Video Conferencing and to contest the case. With the aforesaid direction, the criminal petition stands disposed of accordingly. JUDGE Comparing Assistant