Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 10093 (GAU)

SARIN SURANA AND 2 ORS v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

Bail Appln./974/2025 · 2025-03-27

Susmita Phukan Khaund

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010067812025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./974/2025 SARIN SURANA AND 2 ORS SON OF LATE HANUMAN MAL SURANA, R/O FLAT NO. 301, CHETRIBARI, GOLDEN HEIGHT FLAT OWNERS SOCIETY, P.S.PALTAN BAZAR, GUWAHATI,DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM 2: RAMESH KUMAR PIRTANI S/O LATE NANDA LAL PIRTANI R/O HOUSE NO. 104A CHETRIBARI GOLDEN HEIGHT FLAT OWNERS SOCIETY P.S.PALTAN BAZAR GUWAHATI DIST.KAMRUP (M) ASSAM 3: RAM ADHIKARI S/O LATE HARI ADHIKARI R/OCHETRIBARI GOLDEN HEIGHT FLAT OWNERS SOCIETY P.S. PALTAN BAZAR GUWAHATI DIST. KAMRUP (METRO) ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM Page No.# 2/3 REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B K MAHAJAN, MR. D BORA,MR. N MAHAJAN,MR. P K DAS,MR. A CHAUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS. S MEDHI (INFORMANT) BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER Date : 28.03.2025 Heard Mr. H.R.A Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel and Mr. B.K Mahajan, learned counsel for the petitioners Sarin Surana @ Sarin Kumar Surana, Ramesh Kumar Pirtani and Ram Adhikari who have filed this application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 with prayer for bail as they are behind bars since 25.03.2025 in connection with Paltan Bazar PS Case No. 81/2025 under Section 105 of the BNS, 2023. Heard Mr. D.P Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam and learned counsel Ms. S Medhi for the informant. The petitioners have been forwarded to custody as a child, aged 8 years, has died during construction works in the building at K.C Road, Chatribari. The petitioners are the office bearers of the society of the building and they have been forwarded to custody. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the labourers were not engaged by the petitioners, but, as there was an uproar relating to death of a young child, the petitioners were also forwarded to custody along with the labourers engaged in the construction work. It is further submitted that the FIR clearly reveals that death is not culpable homicide amounting to murder but death was caused by a negligent act of the labourers engaged in the construction work. Page No.# 3/3 The learned counsel for the informant has submitted that an affidavit has been filed and the informant has no objection if the petitioners are released on bail. Considering all aspects, the petitioners are enlarged on bail of Rs 30,000/- each with a suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the C.J.M Kamrup(M). JUDGE Comparing Assistant