Amir Ali @ Amer Ali v. The State of Assam and Anr

ORDER Date : 13.08.2024

Heard Mr. MU Mahmud, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B.Sharma, learned Addl. P.P.for the State respondent No.1. Also heard Mr. I.Hoque, learned counsel for the respondent No.2. This application under section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Surakshya Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely Amir Ali @ Amer Ali praying for pre-arrest bail apprehending arrest in connection with Manikpur P.S. Case No. 66/ 2024 under Section 376 (AB) of the IPC read with Section 4 of the POCSO Act. The allegation in the FIR reveals that on 01.05.2024, at about 12 noon, the minor daughter of the informant aged about 8 years was forcefully taken away by the petitioner to nearby a pond and committed rape on her. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is no way connected with the case. There is a land dispute between the parties. The informant took loan of Rs.8000/- from the petitioner and only to get rid of the debt of the petitioner, the FIR has been lodged and as such, the petitioner may be enlarged on pre-arrest bail. Learned Addl.P.P. has produced the case diary and submits that the victim was a minor (aged 8 years) at the time of the incident and she has implicated the petitioner. The medical report also reveals the age of the victim to be 7/9 years at the time of the incident. Page No.# 3/3 Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 submits that the victim was a minor girl at the time of the incident and the allegation against the petitioner cannot be stated to be false one. As such, he opposed in granting bail to the petitioner. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the case diary, it is seen that the victim was a minor girl aged about 8 years at the time of the incident. Medical report also shows that the victim was aged 7/9 years at the time of the alleged occurrence. The statement of the victim suggests that she has been sexually abused by the petitioner. This court finds sufficient incriminating materials against the present petitioner and as such, this court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the pre-arrest bail application is rejected at this stage. The pre-arrest bail application stands disposed of. Return the case diary.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/3 GAHC010141802024 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oAB/1853/2024o AMIRoALIo@oAMERoALIo S/OoLATEoAINUDDIN,oVILL-oNO.o2oSALABILA,oP.O.-SALABILA,oP.S.- MANIKPUR,oDIST-oBONGAIGAON,oASSAM,oPIN-783392 VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDoANRo REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoPUBLICoPROSECUTOR,oASSAM 2:AJIRANoKHATUNo(INFORMANT) oW/OoJARIPoALI oVILL-oNO.o2oSALABILA oP.O.-SALABILA oP.S.-MANIKPUR oDIST-oBONGAIGAON oASSAM oPIN-78339o AdvocateoforotheoPetitionerooooo:oMR.oMoUoMAHMUD,oMS.oDoBORA,MRoSoISLAM,MRoSoHo MAHMUDo AdvocateoforotheoRespondento:oPP,oASSAM,oIoHOQUEo(R-2),MR.oJoABBASo(R-2)oo Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MALASRI NANDI