Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010189162025 2025:GAU-AS:12099 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2042/2025 MUNNA HUSSAIN CHOUDHURY ALIAS SADDAM HUSSAIN CHOUDHURY SON OF JAMAL UDDIN CHODHURY, R/O KALINAGAR, PART V, KALINAGAR, PANCHGRAM, HAILAKANDI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY PP ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H I CHOUDHURY, H YEASMIN,MR. SAYED SALIM AHMED,MR H R A CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 05.09.2025 Heard Mr. H.R.A. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. H.I. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. By this application, the petitioner has prayed for pre-arrest bail in Page No.# 2/3 connection with Panchgram Police Station Case No. 35/2025 registered under Section 296/132/115(2)/109/3(5) of the BNS, 2023 alongwith Section 4 of the Assam Medicare Service Persons Act. 3. The FIR dated 14.08.2025 reveals that the petitioner alongwith 8 to 10 persons misbehaved verbally and assaulted the on duty Doctor in his hands and tried to kill him with iron rod. 4. Mr. H.R.A. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation made in the FIR does not portray the true facts, inasmuch as, the petitioner had gone to the place of occurrence after the said incident had taken place more specifically upon hearing hue and cry of other persons and that he was not involved in beating up the Doctor. 5. Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State respondent however submits that the witnesses in the instant case have stated about the petitioner that he was present in the group when the Doctor was assaulted by persons gathered in the said group and that he also submits that the CCTV footage also shows the complicity of the petitioner. He also placed the injury report of the Doctor, which reflects that there are injuries on his hands as well as on his forearm and that since the offence involves assaulting the Doctor, who was on duty to attend the patients, is a very serious crime and as such, has prayed that no bail may be granted to the petitioner. 6. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties and have gone through the records. 7. It is reflected in the statements of the witnesses that they saw the petitioner present with other persons at the place of occurrence but no one had stated that they had seen the petitioner assaulting the Doctor. Page No.# 3/3 6. In view of the same, this Court deems it fit that the petitioner may be released on pre-arrest bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 30,000/- with 1 local surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority under the following conditions:- 1. The petitioner will appear before the Investigating Officer within 7 (seven) days from today and will make himself available for interrogation as and when called for. 2. The petitioner will not temper with the evidence or influence any other witnesses. 3. The petitioner will not leave his place of residence without prior permission of the arresting authority. 7. Accordingly, the Anticipatory Bail Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant