Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010158882025 2025:GAU-AS:10159 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2309/2025 KUSUM BARUAH AND 2 ORS. W/O LATE DHANANJAY BARUAH VILL- PURBA KATHALMURI P.O. BAGHMARA BAZAR P.S. PATACHARKUCHI DIST. BAJALI, ASSAM, PIN-781328 2: SMTI. KIRAN DEKA W/O LATE PAREN DEKA VILL- BHAWANIPUR (DEKAPARA) P.O. BHAWANIPUR P.S. PATACHARKUCHI DIST. BAJALI ASSAM PIN-781352. 3: DEBAKANATA KALITA SON OF MANIK KALITA VILL- PASCHIM KATHALMURI P.O. BAGHMARA B AZAR P.S. PATACHARKUCHI DIST. BAJALI ASSAM PIN-78132 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. U K DAS, J M BAISHYA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER 05-08-2025 Heard Mr. U. K. Das, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, for the State respondent. 2. This is an application under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of bail to the accused/petitioners, who were arrested in connection with Patacharkuchi P.S. Case No. 126/2025, under Sections 61(2)/191(27)/117(2)/109/74/308(2)/ 310(2)/324(4) of the BNS, 2023. 3. Case Diary is placed before the Court. I have perused the same. 4. It is submitted by Mr. Das, learned counsel that the present petitioner No.1 was the legally married wife of one Dhananjay Baruah and she was the owner of the land and house where she was residing along with her husband. But, subsequently, the informant claimed herself to be the wife of the deceased Dhananjay Baruah and thereafter, there was some dispute for which a DV proceeding was also initiated by the present accused petitioner No.1. 5. It is also submitted that the present petitioners have not committed any such offence as alleged in the FIR. However, it is a fact that there was some dispute between the petitioner No.1 and the informant, who also claimed herself to be the wife of deceased Dhananjai Baruah, though she was a maid servant. 6. All the accused petitioners are in custody since 03.07.2025 and considering their length of detention, they may be released on bail. Page No.# 3/4 7. However, they will extend their cooperation in further investigation of the case, if they are granted with the privilege of bail. 8. Mr. Borthakur, learned Addl. PP submitted in this regard that the dispute/quarrel took place where the present petitioners along with 14 persons including 12 female and 2 male members came to evict the informant and in that process they have also assaulted the informant along with her minor child. 9. Mr. Borthakur, further submitted that as per the medical report, the injuries sustained by the informant are minor in nature. 10. Considering the entire aspect of the matter, submission of the learned counsel for both sides and on perusing the case diary vis-à-vis the medical report of the victim, I find it to be a fit case to extent the privilege of bail to the accused petitioners. 11. Accordingly, the accused/petitioners, namely, (i) Smti. Kusum Baruah, (ii) Smti. Kiran Deka and (iii) Sri Debakanta Kalita, be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand) each, only with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned SDJM (S), Bajali, subject to the following conditions:- (I) that the petitioners shall fully co-operate with the investigation of the case and shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required in connection with the investigation of the aforesaid P.S. Case and (ii) that the petitioners 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/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. Page No.# 4/4 12. With the above observation and direction, this bail application stands disposed of. 13. Return the Case Diary herewith. JUDGE Comparing Assistant