Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010133562025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2114/2025 ROMIZA BIBI AND ANR W/O JAHIRUL HUSSAIN @ JAHIRUL HOQUE R/O VILL- JHASHKAL PART-III, P.S. AGOMONI DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM, PIN- 783335. 2: JAHIRUL HOQUE @ JOHURUL HUSSAIN S/O LATE BABOR ALI SK R/O VILL- JHASHKAL PART-III P.S. AGOMONI DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 783335 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S RAHMAN, MS. S PHUKAN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER 04.08.2025 Heard Mr. S. Rahman, learned counsel for the accused persons and Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. Page No.# 2/4 2. This application, under Section 483 of the BNSS, is preferred by accused namely, Romiza Bibi and Jahirul Hoque @ Johurul Hussain, who have been languishing in jail hazot since 12.11.2024, in connection with the Sessions Case No. 366/2024, under Sections 120(B)/302/34 of the IPC, pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dhubri (trial court hereinafter), arising out of Agomoni PS Case No. 98/2023, for granting bail. 3. It is to be noted here that the Sessions Case No. 366/2024, has been registered on the basis of one FIR lodged by one Osman Gani, on 03.06.2023. 3.1. The essence of allegation against the present accused persons in the FIR, dated 03.06.2023, is that on 02.06.2023, at about 12:30 pm, accused Rubul Hossain; Romiza Bibi; Rejina Khatun; Anamul Hoque; Feroza Bibi; and Jahirul Hossain, picked up a quarrel with the daughter of the informant and assaulted her by fastening her hand and leg and thereafter, poured kerosene oil on her person and set her ablaze, as a result, she sustained serious injuries on her person. Thereafter, she was taken to Dhubri Medical College and Hospital, but she succumbed to the injuries. 4. Mr. Rahman, learned counsel for the accused persons submits that the present accused were arrested on 12.11.2024, and since then they have been languishing in jail hazot for last 8 months and 23 days. Mr. Rahman further submits that they are the parents of the prime accused, Rubul Hossain and Feroza Bibi, who have already been granted bail by the learned trial court. Mr. Rahman further submits that charge sheet has been filed against the present accused persons showing them as absconder. But, they have appeared before the learned trial court on receipt of summons and thereafter, they have taken into custody by rejecting their bail application. Mr. Rahman also submits that the present accused persons along with co-accused were charged under Sections 120B/302/34 of the IPC and that as many as 21 witnesses have been cited in the charge sheet and out of Page No.# 3/4 which, only 5 witnesses have been examined so far. Mr. Rahman also submits that at the time of occurrence they were living in a separate house and that they are aged persons and they are ready face trial and will appear before the learned trial court regularly. Under such circumstances, Mr. Rahman has contended to allow the petition. 5. Per-contra, Mr. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the petition and submits that in fact the present accused are the prime accused and that the deceased suffered 90% burn injury on her person and died of the same. Mr. Borthakur further submits that the dying declaration of the deceased was recorded by the Doctor, who was examined as PW2 and he has supported the prosecution case and that sufficient evidences are brought on record against them and enlarging them, who are the accused of a serious offence is unwarranted at this stage, as some of the witnesses are yet to be examined. Therefore, Mr. Borthakur has contended to dismiss the petition. 6. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties, I have carefully gone through the petition as well as the documents placed on record and also perused the scanned copy of the record received from the learned trial court. 7. It appears that present accused persons were charge sheeted along with other co-accused and they have been charged under Sections 120B/302/34 of the IPC. It further appears that as many as 21 witnesses have been cited in the charge sheet and out of which, 5 witnesses have already been examined so far. 7.1. The evidence of PW-2, Dr. Firoz Ahmed reveals that he had recorded the dying declaration of the deceased and the said dying declaration indicates that the deceased was burnt with diesel by her father-in-law, mother-in-law and sister- in-law and at the time of the incident, her husband was not present at home. Page No.# 4/4 7.2. Further, PW-3, Smti. Shelly Paul, who was present at the time of recording of the dying declaration, has also supported the prosecution version. The statements of other witnesses, examined by the IO, also indicate complicity of the present accused persons, who are the father and mother in law of the deceased, with the offence alleged in the FIR. 7.3. It also appears from the record that the accused were absconding after commission of the offence and they appeared before the learned trial court after submission of charge sheet and on receipt of the summon from the court. 8. Undoubtedly the offences are serious in nature and trial is going on in view of the above mentioned facts and circumstances, this court is of the view that this is not a fit case where the privilege of bail can be granted to the present accused and accordingly, this bail application stands dismissed. 9. Though Mr. Rahman, learned counsel for the accused persons submits that the prime accused has already been enlarged on bail by the learned trial court, yet, it appears from the dying declaration of the deceased that her husband was not present at the time of commission of the offence. 10. However, the learned trial court is requested to make an endeavor to dispose of the case as early as practicable, without being influenced by any of the observation made herein above. JUDGE Comparing Assistant