Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 19704 (GAU)

GOLAM NOBI AZAD v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

AB/2325/2025 · 2025-09-21

Pranjal Das

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010215732025 2025:GAU-AS:13096 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2325/2025 GOLAM NOBI AZAD S/O LATE AMIRUL ISLAM RESIDENT OF DARUA KAWATHAGI P.S. MANKACHAR, DIST. SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR, ASSAM, PIN-783131. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR Z HUSSAIN, MR. RASHIDUL ISLAM,MS B B AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER 22.09.2025 1. Heard Mr. Z. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Page No.# 2/3 2. This application has been filed under section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraskha Sanhita, 2023, whereby the accused petitioner namely, Golam Nobi Azad, seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Jalukbari P.S. Case No. 300/2025, under Section 103(1)/238 of BNS, 2023. 3. The case was registered based on an FIR dated 13.07.2025 by one Juran Ali. The gist of the allegation is that the present petitioner assaulted the victim/her husband leading to his death and buried his body in the courtyard which was subsequently recovered by the police. 4. The allegation against the present petitioner is that after the death of the deceased, his wife called him and he assisted her in burying the body. 5. On the basis of the case diary, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State submits that similar factual matrix is revealed from the statement of the daughter of the deceased and co-accused recorded before learned JMFC. The main accused/co- accused i.e. Rahima Khatun was enlarged on bail by this Court on 16.09.2025. 6. It is submitted by the prosecution that there is progress in the investigation. So far, the materials against him appear to be is assistance in burying the body. 7. In the circumstances, allowing this petition for pre-arrest bail, it is directed that in the event of arrest in connection with this case, the above-named petitioner shall be allowed to go on bail of Page No.# 3/3 Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) only with one surety of the like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the arresting authority with following conditions: (i) That the petitioner shall appear before the I.O for examination and render full co-operation in the investigation. (ii) That the petitioner shall not intimidate or harass the informant/family; (iii) That the petitioner shall not hamper or tamper with evidence. (iv) That the petitioner shall not abscond. 8. Violation of bail conditions might entail cancellation of the anticipatory bail. 9. Return back the case diary. 10. With the above observations, this anticipatory bail petition stands allowed and stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant