VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Gauhati High Court 2024 › High Court of Gauhati

Kosom Ali v. The State of Assam

Disposed Of
Court
High Court of Gauhati
Decided
25 July 2024
Bench
S. Justice Susmita Phukan Khaundauthor
Case no.
AB 1790/2024

Judgment

ORDER Date : 26-07-2024 Heard Mr. A. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners 1. Kosom Ali, 2. Monowar Hussain @ Monowar Hussain @ Jon and 3. Moyful Khatun.

¶2The petitioners have filed this application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with prayer for pre-arrest bail as they are apprehending arrest in connection with Mankachar Police Station Case No. 139/2024 under Sections 120(B)/302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (G.R. No. 306/2024).

¶3It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioner No. 1 is the brother of the prime accused, the petitioner No. 2 is the son of the petitioner No. 1 and the petitioner No. 3 is the wife of the petitioner No. 1. It is further submitted that the petitioners reside in a different residence and they are in no way connected with the incident of murder. The deceased was the second wife of the prime accused Sahadat Ali. The petitioners of this case are from a different family and the prime accused person's family has also been named in the FIR. The allegation against the petitioners is that the second wife of Page No.# 3/4 Sahadat Ali was killed by the petitioners in collusion with the other accused named in the FIR.

¶4The allegation against the petitioners is that since the marriage of the deceased to the accused No. 1, the petitioners and all the family members have made several attempts to eliminate the deceased and they were successful to eliminate the deceased on 26.06.2024 at about 12.30 AM. It is further submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 were at Guwahati at the time of the incident. The Annexure-3 series is submitted in support of the alibi.

¶5The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has raised serious objection stating although there are no eye witnesses in this case, yet the chain of circumstances incriminates the petitioners. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the statement of the witnesses implicates the petitioners and the other accused named in the FIR. They have alleged that a scene of dacoity has been staged by the accused to screen themselves from the offence of homicide.

¶6I have scrutinized the Case Diary. The merits of this case are not brought to the fore as this case is still under investigation. Investigation has progressed to a considerable extent. The petitioners have pledged to cooperate with the remaining part of the investigation and to abide by any stringent bail conditions if imposed upon them. The petitioners are local residents and they are not flight risks. I have also considered the submissions that eye witnesses are lacking.

¶7Considering all aspects and in view of my foregoing discussions, petition is allowed.

¶8In the event of their arrests, the petitioner Nos. 2. Monowar Hussain @ Page No.# 4/4 Monowar Hussain @ Jon and 3. Moyful Khatun shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) each with a suitable surety like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority under the conditions that:

(i) The petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 10 (Ten) days and cooperate with the investigation.

(ii) The petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 shall not exercise threats to the witnesses.

(iii) The petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission.

¶9On breach of any of the bail conditions, bail order shall stand cancelled.

¶10The interim bail granted to the petitioner No. 1 Kosom Ali vide order dated

12.07.2024 is hereby made absolute.

¶11In terms of the aforesaid observations, this Anticipatory Bail application stands disposed of.

¶12Send back the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Case details

Parties and counsel

PageoNo.#o1/4 GAHC010138432024 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oAB/1790/2024o KOSOMoALIo AGEDoABOUTo58oYEARS,o oSONoOFoLATEoTOFIZUDDINo,o RESIDENToOFoVILLAGE-oSADULLABARI(KALORoPAR),o P.O-KALAPANIo,o P.S-oMANKACHARo,o DISTRICToSOUTHoSALMARAoMANKACHAR,oASSAM,oPIN-783135 2:oMONOWARoHUSSAINo@oJON oSONoOFoKOSOMoALI o RESIDENToOFoVILLAGE-oSADULLABARIo(KALORoPAR) o P.O-KALAPANIo o P.S-oMANKACHARo o DISTRICToSOUTHoSALMARAoMANKACHAR oASSAM oPIN-783135 3:oMOYFULoKHATUN oWIFEoOFoKOSOMoALI o RESIDENToOFoVILLAGE-oSADULLABARIo(KALORoPAR) o P.O-KALAPANIo o P.S-oMANKACHARo o DISTRICToSOUTHoSALMARAoMANKACHAR oASSAM oPIN-78313o Page No.# 2/4 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : IMRAN UDDIN CHOWDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND

Source: High Court of Gauhati, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.