Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010105172025 2025:GAU-AS:8628 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1680/2025 PULIN CHUTIA AND 2 ORS. SO LT . CHANDRA KR CHUTIA R/O VILL- GARHMARA CHAPORI , PS SILAPATHAR , DIST DHEMAJI , ASSAM 2: MONALISHA CHUTIA WO PULIN CHUTIA RO GARHMARA CHAPORI PS SILAPATHAR DIST DHEMAJI ASSAM 3: HAREN CHUTIA SO LT . CHANDRA KR CHUTIA RO GARHMARA CHAPORI PS SILAPATHAR DIST DHEMAJI ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. T CHUTIA, MS S NASRAT Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER Date : 25.06.2025 1. Heard learned Counsel Mr. T.Chutia for the petitioners 1. Pulin Chutia, 2. Monalisa Chutia and 3. Haren Chutia who have filed this application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 with prayer for bail as they behind bars since 16.04.2025 and 18.04.2025 in connection with Silapathar PS Case No. 91/2025 under Sections 103(1)/3(5) of the BNS,2023. 2. Mr. M.P.Goswami, learned Addl.Public Prosecutor is present for the State respondent and has raised serious objection in granting bail to the petitioners stating that there are incriminating materials in the Case Diary. The statement of the witnesses clearly implicate that all the petitioners are complicit despite the fact that the petitioner No.1 is the father of the deceased minor victim. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are behind bars on suspicion. All the family members have been named in the FIR and this is a case of suicide and not a case of homicide. It is submitted that the victim had attempted to commit suicide not once but on several occasions. It is further submitted on behalf of the petitioner No. 1 that it is not plausible for a father to kill his minor daughter. It is submitted that the petitioner No.2 is the mother of a minor child who is only 6 years old. 4. On the contrary, learned Add.Public Prosecutor has submitted that the post-mortem report is not conclusive and viscera has been sent for chemical analysis yet several injuries were detected by the medical officer on the victim’s legs and on her throat which clearly indicates that the victim has been killed and Page No.# 3/4 it is not a case of suicide. 5. I have considered the submissions at the Bar with circumspection. 6. I have also scrutinized the Case Dairy. It is true that the post-mortem report is not conclusive. I have considered the age of the petitioner No. 1 who is 43 years old, a middle aged man. I have also considered the length of detention. 7. It is further submitted by the learned Addl.Public Prosecutor that the petitioner No. 3 had served his sentence for eliminating the victim’s mother and after he was out on bail, the unfortunate incident took place. 8. In view of my foregoing discussions, the bail prayer of petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 is rejected at this stage. 9. However, the petitioner No.1 Pulin Chutia shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/- with a suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned CJM, Dhemaji subject to the following conditions: i) That the petitioner No.1 shall co-operate with the remaining part of the investigation, ii) That the petitioner No.1 shall not exercise any threats to the witnesses. 9. On breach of any of the above conditions, the learned Court is at liberty to immediately cancel the bail granted to the petitioner. 10. In terms of the above observations, the bail application stands disposed of. Page No.# 4/4 11. Send back the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant