Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010110322025 2025:GAU-AS:9503 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1737/2025 NAJIRUL ISLAM SON OF LT. MAINUL ISLAM @ LT. MAINUL HOQUE PERMANENT RESIDENT OF VILL- CHAMADHARA, ERABARI, P.S. JURIA, DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM, AND CURRENT RESIDENT OF VILL- PANBARI, P.S. DIPHU, DIST. KARBI ANGLONG, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR SARFRAZ NAWAZ, A MISHRA,SAMIM RAHMAN,MS SURAYA RAHMAN,MR A W AMAN,MR. SURAJIT DAS Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 24-07-2025 Heard Mr. S. Nawaz, the learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. K. Baishya, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State respondent. Page No.# 2/3 2. This is an application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 with prayer for bail as he is behind bars since 15.03.2025 in connection with Diphu P.S. Case No. 18/2025 u/s 296/118(2)/109 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. It is submitted by Mr. Nawaz that it is an admitted fact that there was a quarrel between the present petitioner and the victim while he was purchasing fish from the petitioner. However, the petitioner is in custody since last 132 days since his arrest and the case has already been charge-sheeted and today the date fixed for framing of charge. Mr. Nawaz further submitted that it is also not disputed that the victim sustained grievous injury on his neck. Further he submitted that there cannot be a question of hampering or tampering with the other witnesses as the present petitioner is not the resident of the locality wherein the incident had happened. However, he will contest the case by regularly appearing before the learned Trial Court below as and when the date is fixed by the learned Trial Court. 4. Mr. Baishya, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted in this regard that today the date is fixed for consideration of charge and trial is about to commence but from the Injury Report of the victim and other circumstances, it is seen that the victim sustained grievous injury and there was an attempt to murder of the victim. He further submitted that apart from the victim, there are several independent witnesses who witnessed the occurrence and being the co- vender of the fish market there is every probability of influencing the evidence of those independent witnesses who are yet to be examined by the Court. Mr. Baishya accordingly raised objection and submitted that till the evidence of the said independent witnesses, the present petition for bail may not be considered as the probability of influencing of witnesses cannot be denied at this stage. 5. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides and Page No.# 3/3 other aspects of the matter, it is seen that the submission made by learned Additional Public Prosecutor about the probability of influencing of the independent witnesses who are also the co-vender cannot be denied at this stage and accordingly I find it proper not to allow the privilege of bail to the petitioner at this stage. 6. The bail application stands rejected. 7. With the above observation, the petition stands disposed of. 8. The petitioner will be at liberty to file a bail application afresh. JUDGE Comparing Assistant