Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010201582025
2025:GAU-AS:12973
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2923/2025 PINKU LASKAR AND ANR S/O- NURUL HOQUE LASKAR, ASSAM 2: RINKU LASKAR S/O- NURUL HOQUE LASKAR BOTH ARE R/O- TULARGRAM PART -I WARD NO-2 SONAI MUNICIPAL BOARD P.O AND P.S- SONAI DIST- CACHAR ASSAM PIN-78811 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M ALOM, MR. M K HUSSAIN,MRS. S Y AHMED,MS. F H AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA
ORDER 19-09-2025 Heard Mr. M. K. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. K. Baishya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, for the State respondent. 2. This is an application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of bail to the accused/petitioners, namely, (i) Pinku Laskar and (ii) Rinku laskar, who have been arrested in connection with PRC Case No. 1624/2025 arising out of Sonai P.S. Case No. 47/2025 under Sections 109(1)/118(2)/191(2)/311 of BNS, with added Sections 132/111(2)/111(3) of the BNS, 2023. 3. Scanned copy of the TCR has been received. Perused the same. 4. It is submitted by Mr. Hussain, learned counsel that the petitioners are innocent and they are not at all connected with the alleged offence. 5. The present two petitioners along with 5 other co-accused of the case earlier moved a pre-arrest bail application, but during pendency of the said application, these two petitioners got arrested in connection with this case on 17.07.2025, but the other co-accused of the case were granted with the privilege of pre-arrest bail. 6. Mr. Hussain, learned counsel further submitted that the charge sheet in the case was filed on 06.08.2025, but till date the charges could not be framed against the
Page No.# 3/4 petitioners and the case is at initial stage. The petitioners are in custody for the last 64 days and considering their detention, the petitioners may be granted with the privilege of bail. 7. However, they are ready and willing to contest the case by appearing before the learned Trial Court on each and every date, the case is fixed. 8. Mr. Baishya, learned Addl. PP submitted in this regard that cognizance of this case was taken on 20.08.2025 and summons have been issued against the other co- accused persons.
He further submitted that on 16.08.2025 after filing of the charge sheet, one bail petition was preferred by the present two petitioners, which was rejected by the learned Trial Court considering the materials in the case diary. 9. Mr. Baishya, learned Addl. PP further submitted that from the medical report of the victim, it is seen that one victim sustained grievous injury on his person and there are sufficient materials against the present two petitioners which reveals from the statement recorded under Section 183 BNS. He accordingly, raised objection and submitted that it is not a fit case to allow the petitioners to go on bail, at this stage. 10. Heard the learned counsel for both sides and I have also perused the scanned copy of the case record and also considering the period of detention already undergone by the present two petitioners vis-à-vis other aspects of the case, I find that further custodial detention of the petitioners may not be required for the purpose of trial of the case and as such I find it a fit case to grant the privilege of bail to the present two petitioners. 11. Accordingly, the accused/petitioners, namely, (i) Pinku Laskar and (ii) Rinku laskar, be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand) each only, with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned CJM, Cachar, Silchar subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make
Page No.# 4/4 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. 12. With the above observation and direction, this bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant