Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010126562025 2025:GAU-AS:10326 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1340/2025 HABIZUDDIN AND ANR S/O- APSORUDDIN. R/O- MOWAMARI, P.O- MOWAMARI, P.S.- SAMAGURI, DISTRICT- NAGAON, ASSAM 2: MIRAJUL ISLAM S/O- HABIZUDDIN. R/O- MOWAMARI P.O- MOWAMARI P.S.- SAMAGURI DISTRICT- NAGAON ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR A SHARMA, MR I AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 07-08-2025 Page No.# 2/4 Heard Mr. A. Sharma, the learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. B. Sharma, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of State respondent. 2. This is an application u/s 482 of the Bharatiaya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita for granting pre-arrest bail to the petitioners in connection with Samaguri P.S. Case No. 85/2024 u/s 120(B)/326/506/34 Indian Penal Code. 3. Scanned copy of the case record has already been received. Perused the same. 4. It is submitted by Mr. Sharma, the learned counsel for the petitioners that the present accused/petitioners are innocent and they have not committed any such offence as alleged in the FIR. The informant borrowed a sum of Rs. 4,85,000/- from the petitioner no. 1 for his business purpose. But, in spite of repeated demand the informant did not return the money and when the petitioners met the informant in the bazaar they demanded for money and in that context the informant attacked him with a sharp weapon causing grievous injury in his person. In that context, the present petitioner no. 1 also lodged an FIR and which is registered and accordingly the case is charge-sheeted. He further submitted that before lodging of the FIR or before the said incident he also issued a notice to the informant demanding his money which was given to the informant by the petitioner. But, he refused to return the money and subsequently lodged the FIR with some false and concocted allegation. 5. He further submitted that during the entire investigation the police never searched for him though he was available in his own house. Rather he also lodged an FIR against the informant. However, they are ready and willing to Page No.# 3/4 contest the case by appearing before the learned Trial Court below on each and every date to be fixed by the learned court, if they are granted with some interim protection. 6. Mr. Sharma, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted in this regard that there are sufficient incriminating materials against both the petitioners and the Case Diary reveals that the I/O made several attempts to interrogate the accused/petitioners. But, they avoided arrest and did not cooperate the I/O in the investigation for which both the petitioners were shown as absconder in the charge-sheet. Mr. Sharma further submitted that the case charge-sheeted against the two petitioners u/s 326 IPC apart from other sections considering the nature and gravity of the offence. 7. Mr. Sharma further submitted that after receipt of notice from the Court both the petitioners took several dates for their appearance through their learned counsel and considering their conduct only, the learned Court below had to issue NBWA against the present petitioners. Mr. Sharma accordingly raised objection and submitted that it is not a fit case to extend the privilege of pre- arrest bail to the accused/petitioners. 8. Heard the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides and perused the materials in the Case Diary as well as the case record and also considered the endeavour made by learned Trial Court below to procure the attendance of the present petitioner. However, considering the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner and the other aspects of the case, both the petitioners are hereby directed to appear before the learned Trial Court below for a regular application for bail, which may be considered in accordance with law. Both the petitioners may appear before the learned Trial Court below within 15 (fifteen) days from the date of order and till then the execution of NBWA issued against Page No.# 4/4 both the petitioners may be stayed/suspended at this stage. 9. With the above observations, the AB stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant