Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010162402025 2025:GAU-AS:10248 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2373/2025 SHADDAM HUSSAIN @ SADDAM HUSSAIN AND ORS S/O- RUMI ALI, R/O- VILL.- JAYANTIPUR P.S- KALIABOR, DIST-NAGAON,ASSAM, PIN- 782137. 2: BABADHAN ALI S/O- LT. JAMALUDDIN AHMED. R/O- VILL.- JAYANTIPUR P.S- KALIABOR DIST-NAGAON ASSAM PIN-782137. 3: NILABH DEKA S/O- TILOK DEKA R/O- VILL.- KOWARITOL P.S.- KALIABOR DIST-NAGAON ASSAM PIN --78213 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP,ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : SABRISH AHMED, S BEGUM,DARAK ULLAH,MS A HUSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR S M ABDULLAH P(INFORMANT),MD IMRAN (INFORMANT),MD R ISLAM(INFORMANT),MS F HUSSAIN(INFORMANT) Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA O R D E R Date : 06.08.2025. Heard Mr. D. Ullah, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the State respondent and Mr. S.M. Abdullah P, learned counsel for the informant. This is an application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of bail to the accused/petitioners, namely, (1) Shaddam Hussain @ Saddam Hussain, (2) Babadhan Ali and (3) Sri Nilabh Deka, who have been arrested on 20.07.2025, in connection with Samuguri P.S. Case No. 159/2025, registered under Sections 329(3)/310(4)/296/351(2) of the BNS, 2023. The case diary is received and perused the same. It is submitted by Mr. D. Ullah, learned counsel for the petitioners that all the sections incorporated in this case are bailable except Section 310(4) of the BNS Act. But from the FIR itself it is seen that only three persons were named in the FIR and for preparation of committing dacoity, minimum five persons are requires. Thus Section 310(4) of the BNS Act is also not attracted against the present petitioner. Further he submitted that at the time of incident, they went to the house of the informant as he was supposed to get Rs.15 lakhs, which was due to the petitioner No.1. But when they arrived in the house of the informant, there was an altercation and the informant came out of the house Page No.# 3/5 with a pistol in his hand and fired with the same two/three rounds of fire and the petitioners as well as the informant went to the police station to lodge complaint against each other. All the accused are behind the bar since 20.07.2025 and thus, the I.O. has got sufficient time to interrogate them. Further the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that on the basis of the case lodged by the present petitioners, the informant was also arrested in connection with Samuguri P.S. Case No. 160/2025, registered under Sections 109/296/351(3)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023, read with Section 27(1)/30 of the Arms Act, 1959. However, the present informant is granted with the interim bail and the petitioners are ready and willing to appear before the I.O. as and when required and cooperate with the investigation of the case, if they are provided with the privilege of bail. Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam submitted in this regard that from the materials in the case diary, it reveals that all these three petitioners went to the house of the informant in the midnight and it is also a fact that the informant came out with his licensed pistol in his hand has fired and thereafter, all the three petitioners and the informant went to the police station and cases/cross cases were lodged by both the parties. However, he submitted that the cases are still at the stage of investigation. Mr. S.M. Abdullah P, learned counsel for the informant submitted in this regard that it was the petitioners who visited the house of the informant in the midnight of the incident. However, he admitted that while there was an altercation, the informant came out of the house with the licensed pistol in his hand and fired three rounds of fire in the air and thereafter, both the petitioners Page No.# 4/5 as well as the informant/victim also visited the Police Station and lodged complaint/cross-complaint. Accordingly, he submitted that the release of the accused/petitioners may hamper or tamper with the further investigation of the case. Heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and considered the materials available in the case diary. I find that further custodial interrogation may not be necessary as the I.O. got sufficient opportunity to interrogate the present petitioners, since 20.07.2025 and hence, I find it a fit case to extend the privilege of bail to the present petitioners. Accordingly, it is provided that on furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) only with 1 (one) surety of like amount, for each of them, to the satisfaction of the learned SDJM (M), Koliabor, Nagaon, the accused/petitioners, namely, (1) Shaddam Hussain @ Saddam Hussain, (2) Babadhan Ali and (3) Sri Nilabh Deka, be enlarged on bail, subject to the following conditions: (i) that the petitioners will make themselves available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required; (ii) that the petitioners will 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 (iii) that the petitioners will not leave the jurisdiction of the learned Page No.# 5/5 SDJM (M), Koliabor, Nagaon, without prior permission. In terms of above, this bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant