Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010142422025 2025:GAU-AS:9948 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2178/2025 MATLEB ALI MANDOL S/O- LATE NUR HUSSAIN MANDOL. VILL.- CHATIPUR, P.O.- DHALIGAON, P.S.- KAJALGAON, DIST.- CHIRANG, ASSAM, PIN-783385 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S AHMED, T UDDIN,MR M RAHMAN,J BORAH Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER 01.08.2025 Heard Mr. S. Ahmed, learned counsel of the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State respondent. 2. This application under Section 483 of BNSS, is preferred by the accused/petitioner, namely, Matleb Ali Mandol, who has been languishing in jail hazot since 13.05.2025 in connection with Kajalgaon P. S. Case No. 74/2025, registered under Sections 103(1)/3(5) of BNS. 3. The case diary was retained earlier; however, the intimation regarding the post-mortem (P.M.) report, which was directed to be called for, has not yet been received. 4. In this regard, Mr. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, has submitted that the Investigating Officer (I/O) could not furnish the said P.M. report. 5. Mr. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner, has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. He further submits that one of the co-accused used to send obscene videos and messages to the petitioner’s wife, which led to quarrels between the petitioner and his wife. Apart from this, the petitioner is not involved in any criminal act. It is also submitted that the petitioner has been in custody for the last 80 days and, considering the period of detention, he may be considered for enlargement on bail. Page No.# 3/4 6. On the other hand, Mr. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, has submitted that the case diary reveals sufficient incriminating materials collected by the I/O against the accused/petitioner. Additionally, one agreement/chuktinama is available in the record, which further creates suspicion against the accused/petitioner. 7. Having heard the submissions of the learned counsels for both sides, I have perused the case diary, which reveals that there are several incriminating materials against the accused/petitioner. However, considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, without delving into the merits, and also taking into account the length of detention undergone by the accused/petitioner, i.e. 80 days, I am of the view that the I/O got ample opportunity to interrogate the accused/petitioner, while keeping him in custody. Accordingly, further custodial interrogation does not appear to be necessary for the purpose of investigation at this stage. 8. Accordingly, it is provided that on furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) only with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chirang, Kajalgaon, the accused/petitioner, namely, Matleb Ali Mandol, be enlarged on bail, subject to the following conditions: (i) that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required; (ii) that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and Page No.# 4/4 (iii) that the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chirang, Kajalgaon, without prior permission. 9. In terms of above, this bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant