Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010133212025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1483/2025 SHAH ALOM SK @ ALOM MOULANA AND ORS S/O- LATE KHALIL UDDIN R/O- VILL.- BASANIR PART-I, NEAR 327 NO. HAZIPARA L.P. SCHOOL. P.S.- DHUBRI, DIST.- DHUBRI, ASSAM 2: SANOWAR HOSSAIN S/O- LATE AKBAR SARKAR @ AKBAR HUSSAIN. R/O- VILL.- BASANIR PART-I NEAR 327 NO. HAZIPARA L.P. SCHOOL. P.S.- DHUBRI DIST.- DHUBRI ASSAM 3: SAYED ALI S/O- LATE ATOWAR HUSSAIN. R/O- VILL.- BASANIR PART-I NEAR 327 NO. HAZIPARA L.P. SCHOOL. P.S.- DHUBRI DIST.- DHUBRI ASSAM 4: NOWSAD ALI S/O- LATE ATOWAR HUSSAIN. R/O- VILL.- BASANIR PART-I NEAR 327 NO. HAZIPARA L.P. SCHOOL. P.S.- DHUBRI DIST.- DHUBRI ASSAM 5: SAIFUL ISLAM S/O- LATE ATOWAR HUSSAIN. R/O- VILL.- BASANIR PART-I NEAR 327 NO. HAZIPARA L.P. SCHOOL. P.S.- DHUBRI DIST.- DHUBRI ASSAM 6: ABDUL HANIF SK S/O- ABDUL SALAM. Page No.# 2/4 R/O- VILL.- BASANIR PART-I NEAR 327 NO. HAZIPARA L.P. SCHOOL. P.S.- DHUBRI DIST.- DHUBRI ASSAM 7: SAHA ALOM SK S/O- JABED ALI. R/O- VILL.- BASANIR PART-I NEAR 327 NO. HAZIPARA L.P. SCHOOL. P.S.- DHUBRI DIST.- DHUBRI ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. Z H AHMED, MR H R A CHOUDHURY,MS F INTAZ,MR. M HOSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 30.07.2025 1. Heard Mr. H. R. A. Choudhury, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Z. H. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. K. K. Parasar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioners, namely, 1. Shah Alom Sk @ Alom Moulana, 2. Sanowar Hossain, 3. Sayed Ali, 4. Nowsad Ali, 5. Saiful Islam, 6. Abdul Hanif Sk And 7. Saha Alom Sk who are apprehending their arrest in connection with Dhubri PS Case No. 70/2025 under Sections 191 (2)/ 191(3)/ 190/ 118(2)/ 109(1)/ 324(5)/305 (a) of BNS, 2023. Page No.# 3/4 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 12.02.2025, one Rahela Khatun has lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-charge of Bazar TOP, AMCO Road, Dhubri, inter alia, alleging that on 07.02.2025 at about 7:00 a.m. one altercation took place between the two groups one led by one Abdul Motin and another led by Naushad Ali and during the altercation one Sujab Ali, who is the brother of Naushad Ali died. Later on, about 150-200 unknown persons of Naushad Ali’s Group came to the house of the informant and damaged the house and cause serious injuries to the husband of the informant. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that this is for the second time, the above named petitioners have approached this Court seeking the anticipatory bail. Their earlier applications for anticipatory bail were rejected on 15.05.2025 by this Court. 5. The learned senior counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners have approached this Court again on the ground that certain medical documents regarding the injuries sustained by the brother of the petitioner no. 1 and one Saibar Ali could not be brought to the notice of this Court on earlier occasion. He also submits that various cross cases were filed against both the parties which were also not brought to the notice of this Court. 6. He has also submitted that the FIR was lodged in this case on 12.02.2025 and since then considerable time has lapsed and in the meanwhile, the investigation might have progressed and considering the progress of the investigation, further custodial interrogation of the petitioners may not be necessary. 7. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the case dairy of Dhubri PS Case No. 70/2025 and has vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the above named petitioners. He submits that on earlier Page No.# 4/4 occasions also, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners was rejected on the ground that sufficient incriminating materials were found against the petitioners in the case diary. 8. He has also submitted that the materials in the case diary indicates that the victim sustained multiple grievous injuries and there are several witnesses who have implicated each one of the petitioners in the offence alleged in the FIR. 9. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and have also perused the case diary. 10. On perusal of the case diary, it appears that though one person from group of the petitioners has died, however, in the retaliatory action taken by the petitioners in respect to death of Sujab Ali, the victim has sustained grievous injuries. There are sufficient incriminating materials against all the petitioners in the case diary. 11. It also appears that the new grounds taken by the petitioners in the present anticipatory bail application does not improve their case so as to justify grant of anticipatory bail to them when their prayer for anticipatory bail was rejected on earlier occasion after perusal of the case diary and after finding sufficient incriminating materials. 12. The prayer for anticipatory bail to the present petitioners is, therefore, dismissed. 13. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant