Rustum Ali And 6 Ors. vs. The State Of Assam

AB 954/2017 BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BORTHAKUR By this application under Section 438 Cr.PC, filed by the petitioners, namely, 1 ) Md. Rustum Ali, 2) Md. Harzot Ali, 3) Md. Haidar Ali, 4) Md. Abdul Khalek, 5) Mustt Azimon Nessa, 6) Ms. Hanufa Khatu, and 7) Md. Omar Sadik, have prayed for pre-arrest bail apprehending their arrest in connection with Laharighat PS Case No. 106/2017 under Sections 147/148/149/447/326 IPC (corresponding to GR Case N o. 759/2017). The case diary, as called for, is placed before the court. Heard Mr. A Alam, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. M P Goswami, learn ed Additional PP, Assam. Mr. A Alam, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the alleged incide nt occurred between two families over the land boundary dispute and in the incid ent, 8 persons sustained injuries from both sides due to mutual attack. Mr. A A lam submits that if the privilege of pre-arrest bail is granted to the petitione rs, they would co-operate in the investigation on any condition. Mr. M Goswami, learned Additional PP, Assam, submits that in the alleged inciden t, 8 persons sustained injuries caused by both blunt and sharp objects. On hearing the learned counsels of both the sides and on scrutiny of the case di ary, this court finds that there is prima-facie abundance of incriminating mater ials against the petitioners, and the investigation is yet to be completed. In the backdrop of the facts and circumstances as emerged from the prima-facie evid ence so far collected by the I/O, this court finds that it is not a fit case to grant the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the pre-arrest bail in respect of the above named petitioners stand s rejected. Let the case diary be returned to the Additional PP, Assam. Send a copy of this order to the I/O.