Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010156132025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2285/2025 ABU KALAM ALI AND ANR S/OMUNNAF ALI VILL- CHUKULIBHARIA P.S. NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST. LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM 2: JAIDUL ISLAM S/O AINUDDIN ALI VILL- CHUKULIBHARIA P.S. NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST. LAKHIMPUR VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S NEOG, MR. B BORGOHAIN,MR B SAIKIA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Linked Case : I.A.(Crl.)/764/2025 ABUKKA SIDDIQUE ALIAS JAIDUL ISLAM ALIAS JAHIDUL ISLAM S/O AINUDDIN ALI. RESIDENT OF VILLAGE CHUKULIBHARIA PS NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST LAKHIMPUR Page No.# 2/5 ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY PP ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR. B BORGOHAIN Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 28.07.2025 1. Heard Mr. B. Borgohain, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. K.K. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, 1. Abu Kalam Ali and 2. Abukka Siddique @ Jaidul Islam @ Jahidul Islam, who are detained behind the bars since 18.06.2025 (for last 40 days) in connection with Panigaon P.S Case No. 37/2025 corresponding to G.R Case No.565/2025 under Sections 196(2)/298/299/3(5)/329(3)/61(2)(a) of BNS, 2023, R/W Section 13(1) of Assam Cattle Preservation Act. Page No.# 3/5 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 18.06.2025, one Sri. Simanta Pathak, SI of Police lodged an FIR before the Officer In-Charge of Panigaon Police Station, inter alia, alleging that during the night patrolling by the Police in the area under Panigaon Police Station it came to notice that some unknown culprits have kept skulls of cows in front of Dhakuakhania Siring Chuk Namghar and the names of 7(seven) accused persons, who are named in the FIR were suspected to be involved in the said offence. The petitioners are also named in the FIR. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are no way involved in throwing of cow’s skull in the front of the Namghar as alleged in the FIR. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are arrested merely on the basis of suspicion and they are languishing behind the bars for last 40 days and considering the period of detention they may be allowed to go on bail. 6. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the offence alleged in this case is of serious nature as there was an attempt by the miscreants to incite religious hatred among the group by throwing skulls of cow in front of a Namghar. 7. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides, though from the materials in the Case Diary, it appears that there is a strong suspicion regarding the involvement of the present petitioners in the offence alleged in the FIR. Page No.# 4/5 8. However, even after laps of 40 days of during which the petitioners were detained behind the bars, the said fact still remains in the realm of suspicion only. The suspicion, howsoever grave may not substitute the concrete evidence, which is lacking at this stage. 9. Considering the fact that the petitioners have undergone the detention of 40 days, which in the considered opinion of this Court, is sufficient to subject them to any kind of custodial interrogation, if same was required. 10. This Court therefore is of the considered opinion that if the petitioners co-operate in the investigation, their further custodial detention may not be necessary. 11. In view of above discussions, the above named petitioners are allowed to go on bail of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) each with one surety of like amount subject to the satisfaction of the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lakhimpur, North Lakhimpur with following conditions . i. the petitioners shall co- operate in the investigation. ii. the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to the informant or to any other person who may be acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts before the Investigating Officer or to any Court. Page No.# 5/5 12. Send back the case diary. 13. Accordingly, this bail application is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant