Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010132842025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2002/2025 AKHTER HUSSAIN @ AKTAR HUSSAIN @ AKTAR HOSEN S/O- HAMJA SHEIKH. R/O- VILL.-PT-II, KALAPAKONI, P.S.- DHUBRI, DIST.- DHUBRI, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY PP ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR SARFRAZ NAWAZ, A MISHRA,MD A RAHMAN,MS SURAYA RAHMAN,SAMIM RAHMAN,A W AMAN,MR. SURAJIT DAS Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER 19.06.2025 Heard Mr. S. Nawaz, learned counsel for the accused and also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam, appearing for the State respondent. Page No.# 2/3 2. This application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, is preferred by the accused, namely, Akhter Hussain @ Aktar Hussain @ Aktar Hosen, who has been languishing in jail hazot since 09.06.2025, in connection with Sessions Case No.31/2024 under Section 379/120B/401/413/420 IPC, for grant of bail. 3. Mr. Nawaz, learned counsel for the accused submits that the accused was charge- sheeted after completion of investigation, under Section 120B/401/413/420 IPC, read with Section 379 IPC and thereafter, the learned Sessions Judge, Baksa, vide order dated 17.01.2024 was pleased to grant bail to him on completion of the investigation. Thereafter, the learned Sessions Judge has fixed the case for consideration of charge vide order dated 29.11.2024 fixing the matter on 03.01.2025. But, on that day, the accused remained absent with step. The next date was fixed on 05.02.2025, and on that day also the accused remained absent and the learned Sessions Judge has fixed the case on 11.03.2025 and on 11.03.2025 the accused remained absent with step and the learned Trial Court has fixed the case on 29.04.2025, for consideration of charge and on 29.04.2025 also, the accused remained absent and filed a petition for his absence and this time, the learned Sessions Judge has dismissed the petition and directed to issue non-bailable warrant of arrest against him and fixed the case on 09.06.2025. Then on 09.06.2025, the accused appeared with a petition showing the ground of his absence on the previous dates and also for allowing him to go on fresh bail and to recall the non- bailable warrant of arrest issued against him. But, the learned Sessions Judge vide order dated 09.06.2025 has dismissed the petition considering the conduct of the accused and taken him to custody and fixed the matter on 23.06.2025 for consideration of charge. Mr. Nawaz also submits that some sort of lapses are there on the part of the accused and that he will appear before the Court of learned Sessions Judge on each and every date and therefore, Mr. Nawaz contended to take a lenient view. 4. On the other hand, Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam, submits that by a reasoned order the learned Sessions Judge has dismissed the petition filed by the accused to grant him fresh bail and taken him into custody and that the charge is yet to be framed and if the accused is enlarged on bail at this stage, it may Page No.# 3/3 cause delay in disposal of the case. 5. Having heard the submission of learned counsel for both the parties, I have carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on record and also perused the order dated 09.06.2025 by which the learned Sessions Judge has taken the accused into custody rejecting his petition for allowing him to go on fresh bail. 6. It appears that the learned Sessions Judge has elaborately discussed the ground for taking him into the custody and in view of the given facts and circumstances on the record and the grounds, so assigned by the learned Sessions Judge, appears to be sound and cogent and further it appears that the conduct of the accused appears to be not at all satisfactory and the next date is fixed for consideration of charge. 7. Under such circumstances, this Court finds no merit in this petition and accordingly, the petition stands dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the accused to approach the Court of learned Sessions Judge after framing of charge and after examination of the complainant of the Mushalpur P.S. Case No.91/2023 under Section 379 IPC read with Section 120B/401/413/420 IPC. In the event of filing an application, the learned Sessions Judge shall consider the same in accordance with law without being influenced by any of the observation made herein above. 8. In terms of above, this bail application stands disposed of. Comparing Assistant Sd/- Robin Phukan JUDGE