Raj Ram Singh vs The State Of Assam And Anr
2024 Latest Caselaw 8294 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Raj Ram Singh vs The State Of Assam And Anr on 12 November, 2024

Author: Manash Ranjan Pathak

Bench: Manash Ranjan Pathak

                                                                Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010198412024




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

                         Case No. : Bail Appln./2911/2024



         RAJ RAM SINGH
         S/O- LT. AGYA RAM SINGH, R/O- RLY QTR. NO. 726 (A), NEAR OJAH
         HEMCHANDRA BIDYAPITH, BHASKAR NAGAR, P.S. GEETANAGAR,
         GUWAHATI, ASSAM, PERMANENT ADDRESS- VILLAGE- TARIGAON, P.O.
         BOKO, DIST.- KAMRUP (R), ASSAM




         VERSUS



         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
         REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM



         2:MISS SUMARI KHATUN
         W/O- MOHAR ALI
          R/O- H/NO. 726(A)
          BHASKAR NAGAR
          RPF FIELD
          NEAR SIV MANDIR
          P.S. GEETANAGAR
          KAMRUP (M)
         ASSAM

          MOB. NO.- 690150815
                                                                                       Page No.# 2/3




Advocate for the Petitioner    : MR. S Z SHEIKH, P J DAS

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,




                                   BEFORE
                 HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK

                                             ORDER

12-11-2024 No representation on behalf of the petitioner on call.

2. Heard Ms. S H Bora, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the State.

3. It is seen that the petitioner on filing this bail application on 19.09.2024 suppressed the fact that evidence of prosecution witnesses were closed after recording evidence of 7 of the prosecution witnesses and his statement under Section 313 CrPC was also recorded on 12.09.2024.

4. Further, it is seen that when the matter was moved on 24.09.2024 by the learned counsel for the petitioner, he did not place before the Court that by order dated 21.09.2024 the case has been fixed before the learned Trial Court on 27.09.2024 for judgment.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner did not appear before the Court today, though names of two counsels have been reflected in the cause list.

6. Pursuant to the order of the Court dated 24.09.2024, Registry has already received the scanned copy of the trial court records, from which Ms. S H Bora, learned APP, Assam has placed before the Court that the learned Special Court (POCSO), Kamrup (Metro) have already passed the judgment on 27.09.2024 in Sessions (Special) Case No. 226/2023 convicting the petitioner under Section 376 AB read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act, sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 25 (twenty five) years with fine of Rs. 20,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for another period of 1 (one) year.

Page No.# 3/3

7. By order dated 24.09.2024, the Court fixed the matter after the Puja Vacation and the Court re-opened on 21.10.2024. Since 21.10.2024 till date, the learned counsels for the petitioner did not place before the Court that in the meanwhile on 27.09.2024 judgment was already passed in said Sessions (Special) Case No. 226/2023 involved in the present bail application.

8. List the matter again on 18.11.2024, showing the full names of the two counsels for the petitioner, namely, Shurot Zamal Sheikh and Pallab Jyoti Das.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant