Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010099952025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1559/2025 SHOYADUR RAHMAN S/O ALAUDDIN, R/O VILL- BASHBARI NO. 7, P.S. MANIKPUR, DIST. BONGAIGAON, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M BISWAS, J SINGPHO,A GHOSAL Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 28.05.2025 1. Heard Mr. M. Biswas, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. J. Baruah, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam. 2. This application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Shoyadur Rahman, who has been detained behind the Page No.# 2/4 bars since 17.04.2025 (for the last 41 days) in connection with Manikpur P.S. Case No. 40/2025, under Section 78/79/108 of the BNS, 2023. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 07.04.2025, the father of the victim girl, namely Abdul Kalam, had lodged an FIR that since six months prior to the date of alleged incident, his daughter used to get phone calls from two phone numbers, namely, 8638061214 and 6002240097, and used to get threatening calls and love proposals, and being unable to bear the same the daughter of the informant committed suicide by hanging. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that though, the petitioner has not been named in the FIR, there was a romantic relationship between the deceased and the petitioner. 5. However, he did nothing to instigate or abate suicide by the victim girl. 6. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that, except Section 108 of BNS, 2023 the other two sections involved in this case, namely, Section 78 and 79 of BNS, 2023 are bailabe. 7. It is submitted that the petitioner has already been detained behind the bars for the last 41 days, and considering this period of detention, he may be allowed to go on bail. 8. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the case diary of Manikpur P.S. Case No. 40/2025, and has submitted that though, the post-mortem report is available, however, the official report in respect of the viscera of the dead body is yet to be collected. Hence, the actual cause of death is not mentioned in the post-mortem report. 9. He also fairly submits that though, there are materials on the record indicating that the petitioner used to make video call with the deceased. The Page No.# 3/4 deceased, before her death, made a video call to the petitioner, informing him that she is committing suicide. 10. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel from both the sides, and gone through the case diary of Manikpur P. S. Case No. 40/2025. 11. Though, there are materials available in the case diary that the petitioner and the deceased were in romantic relationship, however, as of now, there is no material to indicate that the petitioner aided or instigated, in abetting the suicide by the victim. 12. Further, considering the fact that the petitioner has already been detained behind the bars for last 41 days, this Court is of considered opinion that if he cooperates in the investigation, his further custodial detention may not be necessary. 13. Hence, in view of above, the above-named petitioner is allowed to go on bail of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only), with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bongaigaon subject to the following conditions: i. That the petitioner shall co-operate in the investigation. ii. 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. 14. This bail application is, accordingly, disposed of. Page No.# 4/4 15. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant