Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 18824 (GAU)

AYON CHOWDHURY v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

Bail Appln./2932/2025 · 2025-09-24

Pranjal Das

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010200512025 2025:GAU-AS:13335 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2932/2025 AYON CHOWDHURY SON OF SRI ARUN CHOWDHURY PERMANENT RESIDENT OF H/NO. 146, NEW COLONY, RICHAL NEAR G.I.F. GATE NO. 2, P.S. ADHARTAL,DIST. JABBALPUR STATE- MADHYAPRADESH, PRESENT ADDRESS- N-AREA, POLE NO. 1500W203, NEAR SHITALA MANDIR, LANKA ASSAM, PIN- 782446. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR E AHMED, MISS R A CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER 25.09.2025 1. Heard Mr. E. Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for the accused petitioners as well as Mr. D. P. Goswami, learned Addl. P.P., Assam appearing for the State Page No.# 2/2 respondent. 2. This petition under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the accused-petitioners, namely, Ayon Chowdhury, who are stated to have been arrested on 16.08.2025 praying for grant of bail in connection with Umrangso PS Case No. 17/2025 under Sections 103(1) BNS added Section 3(5)/61(2) of BNS Act. 3. The case arose out of an FIR lodged by the son of the deceased with the allegation that some unknown persons have killed his mother. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused is an engineer in L & T company and he is neither named in the FIR nor involved. He was arrested solely on the basis of suspicion during investigation. 5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor produced the case diary and submits that one Stephan Hanse was arrested and implicated as the person who committed the alleged murder upon being engaged by the present accused and other person. The same also emerged from the statement of the said Stephan Hanse. 6. Apart from the statement of the co-accused other materials are also stated to have implicated the present accused and the other co-accused. I am of the view that at this stage it may be prudent not to grant bail. 9. Accordingly, this bail application stands rejected and disposed of. Return the case dairy. JUDGE Comparing Assistant