Rakibul Islam and Anr v. The State of Assam

ORDER Date : 14-02-2023 Heard Mr. M. Ahmed, learned counsel for the applicants. Also heard K. K. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State respondent.

This application is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying for granting pre-arrest bail to the accused/applicant in connection with Barpeta P. S. Case No.1058/2022, registered under Section 120(B)/468 /471/420/ 417 of the Indian penal Code.

Case Diary has been received, and I have perused the same. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. M. Ahmed, that though in the FIR the name of the applicants has been reflected, but they are not at all involved in the alleged offence. The applicants are small business-men, who are running a Diagnostic Centre at Barpeta town along with one co-accused. Hence, the allegations made upon the accused/applicants are totally false and concocted. The applicants are the permanent resident of Barpeta District, Assam and there are no chances of absconding. Further, they are praying for grant of the privilege of pre-arrest bail and also states that they will co-operate the investigating agency, as and when required, if, the pre-arrest bail are granted to them.

In this context, Mr. K. K. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that from the Case Diary and the statement of the witnesses, it reveals that there are sufficient incriminating materials available against the Page No.# 3/3 accused/applicants, and they are running a racket of obtaining Scholarship's in the name of the fake students. It is also submitted that the accused/applicants along with the Principal and the Assistant, are preparing some fake identity card in the name of the fake students and uploaded documents in the concerned Portal for obtaining Scholarship. Thus, Mr. K. K. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has raised objection in the prayer made by the applicants.

Considering the submissions made by the learned Advocates of both sides, I have perused the Case Diary, which reveals that the IO has collected sufficient incriminating materials against the present accused/applicants showing their direct involvement in the alleged offence and the investigation is still in process and there is also probability of involvement of other culprits in the entire racket of fake scholarship scam. More so, the statement of the witnesses recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., also reveals their modus operandi in this case. So considering the entire facts and circumstance of this case as well as perusing the case diary and statement of the witnesses recorded by the I.O., I find that further custodial interrogation of the accused/applicants are necessary to unearth some more facts of the case and accordingly, I am of the view that this is not a fit case where the privilege of pre-arrest bail can be granted to the accused/applicants at this stage and accordingly, the same stands rejected. In view of above, this Anticipatory Bail application stands disposed of. Case Diary be returned. JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/3 GAHC010260772022 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oAB/3734/2022 RAKIBULoISLAMoANDoANR S/O-oJONABoALI oR/O-oVILL.-oDONGRA oP.S.oANDoDIST.oBARPETA oASSAM 2:oJAKIRoHUSSAIN S/O-oNAYEBoALI oR/O-oVILL.-oPAHUMARA oP.S.oANDoDIST.oBARPETA oASSAM oVERSUS THEoSTATEoOFoASSAM REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoPUBLICoPROSECUTOR oASSAM o------------ oAdvocateoforo:oMRoMoAHMED Advocateoforo:oPP oASSAMoappearingoforoTHEoSTATEoOFoASSAM ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA