Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010077632025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/855/2025 SABINA YESMIN AMIR HUSSAIN SHEIKH AND 7 ORS. D/O- AMIR HUSSAIN, R/O NAGAYAPAM, P.S. JAMUNAMUKH, DIST HOJAI, ASSAM 2: SADIK ULLAH BHUYAN S/O ALI ARJUN BHUYAN 3: FATEMA BEGUM W/O SADIK ULLAH BHUYAN 4: GULZAR HUSSAIN BHUYAN S/O SADIK ULLAH BHUYAN 5: PARBINSULTANA ZAMAN D/O SADIK ULLAH BHUYAN PETITIONER 2 TO 5 ARE R/O BORJARI MAJ GAON P.S. JAMUNAMUKH DIST. HOJAI ASSAM 6: MAIN UDIN BHUYAN S/O SADIK ULLAH BHUYAN R/O NAGAYAPAM P.S.JAMUNAMUKH DIST. HOJAI ASSAM 7: ALLAUDDIN S/OABU TAYAB R/O BORJARI MAJ GAON P.S.JAMUNAMUKH DIST. HOJAI Page No.# 2/3 ASSAM 8: MAMAN CHOUDHURY (HAFIZ) S/O ABU TAYAB R/O BORJARI MAJ GAON P.S.JAMUNAMUKH DIST. HOJAI ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MD. M H CHOUDHURY, R. BARUAH,TANZIM L. CHOUDHURY,MR. S N AHMED,MR. P CHAKRABORTY,MR MONZUR K CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. A K AZAD,MR. A K AZAD (FOR INFORMANT),MR. P K ROYCHOUDHURY (FOR INFORMANT) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA ORDER 11.06.2025 Heard Md. M H Choudhury, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners, assisted by Mr. S N Ahmed, Advocate. Mr. Bhaskar Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam and Mr. P K Roychoudhury, learned counsel representing the informant. This application has been filed under Section 482(1) of the BNSS, 2023 by the petitioners in connection with Jamunamukh P.S. Case No. 12/2025. Pursuant to the interim order dated 10.04.2025, the petitioners have appeared before the Investigating Officer and their statements have already been recorded. Mr. Roychoudhury has objected to this bail application. According to him, these petitioners have produced false documents showing the informant to be a death person and they have produced some documents to grab his properties. Further, Mr. Roychoudhury submits that petitioners do not deserve to be given privilege of pre-arrest bail. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the sides. Page No.# 3/3 Since the petitioners have appeared before the Investigating Officer and have been cooperating with the investigation, this court is of the opinion that custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not necessary. Hence, the prayer for pre-arrest bail of the petitioners is allowed. Accordingly, the interim order dated 10.04.2025 granted to the petitioners is made absolute. The bail application is disposed of. Case Diary shall be returned. JUDGE Comparing Assistant