Jina Bibi and 3 Ors v. The State of Assam

ORDER Date : 26-04-2023 Heard Mr. S.M. Mollah, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. K.K. Parashar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.

¶2Apprehending arrest in connection with Palashbari P.S. Case No. 324/2022, under sections 143/147/148/326/325/302 IPC, the petitioners namely, (1) Jina Bibi, (2) Rahima Bibi, (3) Monowara Begum @ Monowara Bibi, and (4) Sanjib Ali @ Idrish Ali, have filed this third application for pre-arrest bail under section 438 CrPC.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners and the informant are close relatives. It is also submitted that the role of the petitioners in the alleged offence cannot be culled out from the FIR. It is also submitted that the petitioner no. 4, namely, Sanjib Ali @ Idrish Ali is related to both sides, i.e. informant and the accused, and although he had not participated in the alleged assault and killing of members of the informant's side, he has been made an accused as he resides in the neighbourhood.

¶4The learned Add. P.P. has produced the case diary and has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶5This is the third anticipatory bail application of the petitioners. Page No.# 3/4 The prayer of the petitioners for pre-arrest bail was rejected by order dated

02.11.2022, passed by this Court in AB No. 2615/2022, and again by order dated 09.03.2023, passed by this Court in AB No. 3818/2022.

¶6The case diary discloses sufficient materials against the petitioners. The case diary reveals that on 29.08.2022, at around 2.14 pm, Rahima Bibi (petitioner no. 2) and Monowara Bibi (petitioner no. 3) had held Monsur Ali (since deceased), the brother of the informant and at that time, Jina Bibi (petitioner no. 1) had handed over a dagger to Akhtar, who had stabbed and killed Monsur Ali (the deceased), who was the younger brother of the informant and that the FIR named accused persons had also allegedly tried to kill Hamid Ali, the elder brother of the informant.

¶7As per the post mortem report, death was "due to hemorrhage and shock as a result of injuries sustained over the body as described." As per the medical opinion, all the injuries were ante-mortem and caused by pointed sharp cutting weapon, which was homicidal in nature.

¶8On a perusal of the case diary, it is observed that the witnesses examined by the I.O so far have implicated the petitioner nos.1, 2 and 3. One of the witnesses examined by the I.O., has also implicated the petitioner no. 4 of participating in the assault, which resulted in death of the younger brother of the informant.

¶9Under such circumstances, this Court does not find this to be a fit case to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioners.

¶10Thus, in the interest of investigation, the prayer for anticipatory Page No.# 4/4 bail is once again refused.

¶11Let the case diary be sent back along with a copy of this order.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/4 GAHC010076672023 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oAB/1308/2023o JINAoBIBIoANDo3oORSo W/OoRAJIBoALI,oR/OoDAHALI,oHALIGAON,oP.S.-PALASHBARI,oDIST- KAMRUPo(R),oASSAM 2:oRAHIMAoBIBI oW/OoUDDUoALI oR/OoDAHALI oHALIGAON oP.S.-PALASHBARI oDIST-KAMRUPo(R) oASSAM 3:oMONOWARAoBEGUMo@oMONOWARAoBIBI oD/OoUDDUoALI oR/OoDAHALI oHALIGAON oP.S.-PALASHBARI oDIST-KAMRUPo(R) oASSAM 4:oSANJIBoALIo@oIDRISHoALI oS/OoUDDUoALI oR/OoDAHALI oHALIGAON oP.S.-PALASHBARI oDIST-KAMRUPo(R) oASSAo VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMo REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoPUBLICoPROSECUTOR,oASSAM Page No.# 2/4 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S M MOLLAH Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA