GAUHATI HIGH COURT ISSUES ORDER ON IKRAM ALI V/S THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR

GUWAHATI, India, Jan. 14 -- Gauhati High Court issued the following order on Dec. 15:

1. Heard Mr. D.R. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. A. Begum, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the respondent State.

2. A First Information Report [FIR] was lodged against the petitioner by the prosecutrix on 05.07.2013 before the Officer In-Charge, Tihu Police Station. The said FIR was registered as Tihu Police Station Case no. 56/2013 for the offences under Sections 458/323/427/366/376, Indian Penal Code [IPC]. After investigation, the Investigating Officer [I.O.] submitted a charge-sheet vide Charge-Sheet no. 252/2015 on 31.07.2015 finding a prima facie case well established against three accused persons including the petitioner herein for commission of the offences under Sections 457/366/376, IPC. In the Charge-Sheet, the petitioner was shown as an absconder. The other two charge-sheeted accused persons stood the trial before the Court of learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Nalbari ['the Trial Court', for short] in Sessions Case no. 59/2015.

3. The charges were framed against the charge sheeted accused persons for the offences under Sections 457/506/376/34, IPC and after the trial, the Trial Court recorded a finding that the prosecution could not establish a case against the two accused persons who stood in the trial, beyond all reasonable doubt and they were acquitted by the Trial Court vide a Judgment dated 15.10.2015.

4. In so far as the petitioner who was absconding during the trial is concerned, the prosecutrix deposed regarding his identity and the same was recorded in paragraph 9 of the Judgment dated 15.10.2015.

5. The petitioner has approached this Court by the present criminal petition seeking recall of the Non-Bailable Warrant Arrest [NBWA] issued against him as well as issuance of Proclamation & Attachment [P&A] directed by the Trial Court during the course of the proceedings of Sessions Case no. 59/2015.

6. The petitioner has sought to explain his absence during the trial by stating that after lodging of an FIR by him on 05.07.2013 against two of the relatives of the prosecutrix of Sessions Case no. 59/2015, he went to Chennai in search of job and he did not return to his native village for years together. The petitioner has stated that he had no knowledge about filing of the FIR on 05.07.2013 by the prosecutix. It is only recently the petitioner came to his native village and has come to learn about the issuance of NBWA and P&A against him in Sessions Case no. 59/2015.

7. The explanation provided by the petitioner is found unsatisfactory for recalling of the Non-Bailable Warrant Arrest [NBWA] as well as issuance of Proclamation & Attachment [P&A] against him. On examination, no infirmity has been found in the procedure followed by the Trial Court in issuing NBWA and P&A against the petitioner. The petitioner did not appear in the trial for about ten years. It is only after acquittal of the other two charge-sheeted accused persons the petitioner has approached this Court seeking the above relief.

8. In the above fact situation obtaining in the case, the relief sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted and the criminal petition is accordingly dismissed. The petitioner is, however, at liberty to approach the Trial Court to stand in the trial.

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.