Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010083922025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/924/2025 NUR ISLAM @ NUR ISLAM ALI R/O- BAYASHA, P/O- POKDO, P/S- SARTHEBARI, DISTRICT- BARPETA, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. J A AHMED, MR. K M HASSAN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 03.06.2025 1. Heard Mr. K. M. Hassan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Baishya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Nur Islam @ Nur Islam Ali, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Sarthebari P.S. Case No. 01/2025 under Sections 329(4) /117(2) /118(2) /303(2) /351(3) /3(5) of BNS. Page No.# 2/4 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 02.01.2025, one Mainal Ali had lodged an FIR naming therein six accused persons including the present petitioner, inter alia, alleging that on 21.12.2024 when on a complaint by the wife of the first informant, namely, Nurjahan Begum, the police personnel brought on Mohammad Ali for interrogation, the accused persons named in the FIR trespassed in the house of the informant and assaulted the informant as well as his wife with bamboo sticks, rod, etc. causing injuries on his person. It is also alleged that some cash amount of Rs.10,000/- and golden earring of the wife of the informant was also taken away. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and though he was present at the place of occurrence, he went there to witness the commotion and to rescue the informant. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that earlier the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail by the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Barpeta and in pursuant to the directions of the Court he had appeared before the Investigating Officer and his statement was also recorded under Section 183. However, later on his anticipatory bail was cancelled as the Court found that a subsequent bail application was filed by his lawyer. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was unaware about filing of the subsequent bail application by his lawyer when he was already on bail in the bail granted by the learned Sessions Judge, Barpeta. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that custodial detention of the petitioner may not be necessary as his statement has already been recorded. He also submits that he is ready to co-operate in the investigation. However, he apprehends that the police may arrest him. 6. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has Page No.# 3/4 produced the case diary of Sarthebari P.S. Case No. 01/2025 and has submitted that though the petitioner was granted bail by the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Barpeta, however, the same was later on rejected as in the later case, the mention about the earlier case was not there. He also submits that there are incriminating materials against the petitioner in the case diary. 7. I have perused the case diary which has been produced before this Court by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and have gone through the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the sides. 8. Since, it appears from record that once the petitioner has appeared before the Investigating Officer and his statement recorded under Section 180 of BNSS is there in the case diary, this Court is of considered opinion that his further custodial interrogation may not be necessary, if he co-operates in the investigation. 9. In view of above, this anticipatory bail application is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to appear before the Investigating Officer of Sarthebari P.S. Case No. 01/2025 within a period of seven days from the date of this order and co-operate in the investigation. If he does so within the stipulated period of time, in the event of his arrest, in connection with the aforesaid case, he shall be allowed to go on bail of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) with one surety of like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the arresting authority with following condition:- (i) That the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person who may be acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts of the case before the Investigating Officer; Page No.# 4/4 (ii) That the petitioner shall co-operate in the investigation; 10. This anticipatory bail application is accordingly disposed of. 11. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant