Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010179482026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2004/2026 SHAH ALOM SK ALIAS ALOM MOULANA S/O LATE KHALIL SK LATE KHALIL UDDIN, R/O VILL BHASSANIR CHAR PART-I, NEAR 327 NO. HAZIPARA L.P. SCHOOL, P.O. A.M. CO. ROAD, P.S. DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR M H AHMED, I AMIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 27.08.2026 1. Heard Mr. M. K. Ahmed, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. P. Goswami, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. This application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Shah Alom Sk Alias Alom Moulana praying for pre-arrest bail in connection with PRC Case No. 1242/2025 pending Page No.# 2/4 before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dhubri, corresponding to Dhubri P.S. Case No. 70/2025 under Sections 109(1)/117(2)/115(2)/190/191(2)/ 191(3)/305(a)/118(2)/324(6) of the BNSS, 2023. 3. The facts relevant for consideration of this bail application is that on the basis of an FIR lodged on 13.02.2025 by one Mstt. Rahela Khatun before the Officer-in-Charge of Dhubri Police Station, Dhubri P.S. Case No. 70/2025 was registered. 4. It was alleged in the FIR that the present petitioner along with other co-accused persons assaulted the husband of the complainant with deadly weapon as a result of which, he sustained serious injuries. 5. Thereafter, the investigation was initiated, and after completion of the investigation, charge sheet was laid under the above mentioned Sections of the BNSS, 2023 against the accused persons including the present petitioner. 6. It is pertinent to mention herein that the name of the present petitioner has been shown as an absconder in the charge-sheet. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present case, wherein the charge-sheet has been laid against the present petitioner is a counterblast against the case filed by the side of the present petitioner in which one Sujab Ali had died and an FIR was lodged against the complainant side also. 8. He submits that in this case, the 13 number of accused persons are already on bail, and the present petitioner is also willing to cooperate in the trial. sHowever, since the offence under Section 109 Page No.# 3/4 of BNSS, 2023 is involved, which is triable by the Court of Sessions. Hence, he submits that due to embargo contained in Section 232(A) of BNSS, 2023, he may not be granted bail even if he surrenders before the Committal Court due to the embargo on the part of the Committal Court to grant bail in such cases. 9. On the other hand, Mr. D. P. Goswami, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed the grant of pre-arrest bail in this case on the ground that charge-sheet has already been filed and summons were issued against the accused persons, including the present petitioner. He further submits that on earlier occasion, during the stage of investigation, the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dhubri, had earlier rejecting the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail to the present petitioner, on the ground that sufficient incriminating materials are there on record. 10. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and have also gone through the materials available on record. 11. It appears that before approaching this Court, the petitioner approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dhubri, by filing an application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023. It also appears that after going through the records as well as case diary, the learned Additional Sessions Judge rejected the prayer on the ground that there are sufficient incriminating materials against the present accused person. 12. This Court is exercising concurrent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023, as such, unless any new ground is shown by the Page No.# 4/4 petitioner by preferring a subsequent application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023, there seems to be no justification to come to a different conclusion from that which has been arrived at by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dhubri. 13. As such, this Court does not find any ground to issue a favorable order under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023. 14. This anticipatory bail application is, accordingly, rejected. JUDGE Comparing Assistant