Tajib Ali vs The State Of Assam
2022 Latest Caselaw 3834 Gua

                                                                       Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010182122022




                              THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
   (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                               Case No. : Bail Appln./2265/2022

            TAJIB ALI
            S/O RAMJAN ALI
            VILL- BERABAK PART-I,
            P.S. SONAI
            DIST. CACHAR, ASSAM



            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM
            REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM



Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. N UDDIN

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM




                                    BEFORE
                    HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA

                                          ORDER

Date : 27-09-2022

Heard Mr. N. Uddin, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Bhaskar Sarma, the learned Addl. P.P. for the State.

Page No.# 2/4

2. The petitioner, namely, Tajib Ali, who was arrested on 23.08.2022 in connection with Silchar P.S. Case No. 1439/2022, under sections 120B/199/420/468 IPC, is praying for regular bail under section 439 Cr.P.C.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that a false FIR has been filed by the Administrative Officer of The New India Insurance Co. Ltd. on 06.01.2022 to the effect that on 17.10.2017, one Ajim Uddin, who was a day labourer was engaged by a person to pluck betel nut from tree and while working he fell down from the tree and received grievous injury and he was taken to SMCH, where he was declared brought dead, and there the two FIR named accused had then given history of incident to the effect that the said Ajim Uddin had died due to falling from the height. The said accused had also signed an inquest report showing that the deceased was wearing a half pant and a full shirt. However, after two months, the petitioner herein had filed a complaint case before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Silchar, alleging that Alim Uddin had died on 17.10.2017, being hit by a motorcycle of FIR named accused no. 3. Accordingly, Katigorah P.S. Case No. 727/2017 was registered. Thereafter, an MACT case was filed, which was registered as MAC Case No. 456/2018 by the FIR named accused no. 1 with her 11 year old minor daughter, but by judgment dated 13.05.2022, the claim was dismissed. It has been submitted that the FIR named accused no. 1 has filed a MAC appeal before this Court, where this Court was pleased to admit the appeal and had issued notice. Accordingly, it has been submitted that as the appeal was pending it cannot be said that the claim was false. Accordingly, the learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed for bail.

4. The learned I.O. has produced the case diary and has objected Page No.# 3/4

to the prayer for bail on the ground that the petitioner along with the two other FIR named accused had manufactured a false MAC case to commit insurance fraud.

5. On a perusal of the case diary, it appears from the investigation carried out so far that the petitioner, who is the FIR named accused no. 2 had manufactured a false MAC case and claimed a compensation of Rs.19,96,000/- with connivance of several persons, where everyone involved had a definite role to play, including the FIR named accused no.1, who was the widow of Alim Uddin. It appears that as the vigilant officers of the Insurance Company had found out the actual events and accordingly, the claim was dismissed. Thus, the submissions made by the learned Addl. P.P. that this was a case of insurance fraud is found to have some force. Therefore, the mere filing of the MAC appeal would not entitle the petitioner to be enlarged on bail.

6. In a case of this nature, where public money is sought to be siphoned off by making false MAC claim, the Court is of the considered opinion that it would not be appropriate to release the petitioner on bail, who appears to be the mastermind in manufacturing a false MAC claim by converting the accident of person falling from betel-nut tree to be a case of the said person dying in a road traffic accident.

7. Thus, the petitioner is a FIR named accused person and the case diary reveals that there are sufficient materials to suggest that the petitioner, who is one of the three co-accused, is instrumental in manufacturing false and fabricated MAC claim. Thus, as the involvement of the petitioner in the alleged offence is observed in the case diary, the prayer for bail to the petitioner, Page No.# 4/4

namely, Tajib Ali, is rejected at this stage.

8. The case diary is returned.

9. This application is disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant