ABUL QUASIM MD SALMAN AND ANR v. THE STATE OF ASSAM
AB/1867/2025 · 2025-09-15
Pranjal Das
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 17003 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 17003 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010171752025
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1867/2025 ABUL QUASIM MD SALMAN AND ANR SON OF LATE IMDADUR RAHMAN OF VILL- DULLAVPUR, P.O.
KANAIBAZAR, P.S. PATHARKANDI, DIST. SRIBHUMI, ASSAM 2: MISBAH UDDIN SON OF ABDUL MANNAN OF VILL- SONATULA P.O. ASHOLKANDI
P.S. PATHARKANDI
DIST. SRIBHUMI ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE LEARNED PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A S TAPADER, R J OJAH,MR M AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER 16.09.2025
1. Heard Mr. A. S. Tapader, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also
Page No.# 2/3 heard Mr. D. P. Goswami, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam appearing for the State respondent.
2. This petition under Section 482 BNSS is filed for granting the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners, namely, Abul Quasim Md. Salman and Misbah Uddin, apprehending arrest in connection with Patharkandi P.S. Case No. 163/2025 registered u/s 299/196/272/351(2)/3(5) IPC.
3. The case arose out of an ejahar dated 04.07.2025, lodged by alleged victim i.e. Rahul Roy, stated to be a post-graduate teacher at Asimia H.S. School in the district of Sribhumi (karimganj).
4. The gist of allegations is that three fellow teachers of the school including the two present petitioners have been harassing and humiliating him and also made derogatory remarks pertaining to his religious belief.
5. It may be mentioned that by order, dated 04.08.2025, this Court granted the privilege of interim pre-arrest bail to the petitioners.
6. Mr. D. P. Goswami, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, submits that the case diary shows that the petitioner appeared before the investigating officer and got his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. in terms of the interim pre-arrest bail granted earlier. In this backdrop, I am of the view that confirming the interim bail may not prejudice investigation.
7. Accordingly, the interim pre-arrest bail granted vide order, dated 04.08.2025 is hereby made absolute, subject to the following conditions- (i) That the petitioner shall co-operate with the remaining investigation;
Page No.# 3/3 (ii) That they shall not hamper or tamper with evidence.
8. This disposes of the anticipatory bail application.
9. Return the case diary.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant