SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(GAU) 7055

HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Mridul Kumar Kalita, J
HASSINA BEGUM – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF ASSAM – Respondent
AB / 2365 / 2024



Advocates:
MR. P BORDOLOI, MR. M ALAM

Anticipatory bail may be granted even if the petitioner is not named in the FIR, provided they cooperate with the investigation and meet specified conditions.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 120

(B), 420, 468, 409 - Anticipatory bail application - Petitioner apprehending arrest in connection with allegations of financial irregularities under Ayushman Bharat, PMJAY Scheme - Petitioner not named in FIR but is wife of an accused - Interim bail granted subject to conditions. (Paras 2, 4, 8)

(B) Anticipatory bail - Criteria for granting anticipatory bail includes the nature of accusations and the petitioner's cooperation with the investigation - Interim protection granted to petitioner considering her non-involvement in FIR. (Paras 7, 8)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, Hassina Begum, is apprehensive of arrest related to allegations of financial misconduct in a government health scheme. She is not named in the FIR but is related to one of the accused. (Paras 2, 4)

Findings of Court:
The petitioner shall be allowed interim bail upon cooperation with the investigation and adherence to specified conditions. (Paras 8)

Issues: The main issues included whether the petitioner should be granted anticipatory bail despite not being named in the FIR and the conditions for such bail. (Paras 4, 8)

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for cooperation in the investigation and the importance of not being named in the FIR as a significant factor in granting interim bail. (Paras 8)

Result: Interim bail granted.

ORDER

09.09.2024

1. Heard Mr. P. Bordoloi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam.

2. This application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Hassina Begum, who is apprehending her arrest in connection with Doboka P.S. Case No. 148/2024 (corresponding to G.R. Case No. 2029/2024) under Section 120(B)/420/468/409 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The gist of accusation against the present petitioner is that on 13.08.2024, the Joint Director of Health Services, Hojai, Assam had lodged an FIR before the Officer-In-Charge of Doboka Police Station, inter alia, alleging certain financial irregularities and malpractices under “Ayushman Bharat, PMJAY Scheme” by the petitioner and some other co-accused persons.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that though the petitioner has not been named in the FIR, however, as she happens to be the wife of one of the accused, namely, Imdad Chand, police is also searching for her.

5. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that a connected Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2244/2024 in the same case, arising out of same police station case has been fixed on 17.09.2024, where case diary has already been called for. Hence, he prays for fixing this matter on 17.09.2024 for case diary.

6. Let this case be listed on 17.09.2024, along with the A.B. Case No. 2244/2024.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that three of the co-accused has already been granted interim protection by this Court and therefore, he seeks interim protection for the present petitioner also.

8. Considering the fact that the present petitioner is not named in the FIR and her apprehension of getting arrested is only because she happens to be the wife of one of the co-accused, namely, Imdad Chand, it is hereby directed that she till arrival of the case diary, she shall co-operate in the investigation. If she does so, in the event of her arrest, in connection with Doboka P.S. Case No. 148/2024, she shall be allowed to go on interim bail of Rs. 30,000/- with a suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority, subject to the conditions that:-

i. That the petitioner shall cooperate in the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer; and ii. That the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any other persons who may be acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such persons from disclosing such facts before the Investigating Officer.

9. List accordingly on 17.09.2024.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top