Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010227572025 2025:GAU-AS:14180 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3297/2025 SRI PHULEN BORAH AND 2 ORS. S/O KHORUMON BORA R/O VILL.- DHEKIAJULI WARD NO. 10, PO AND PS- DHEKIAJULI, DIST.- SONITPUR, ASSAM. 2: MD EMRAJUL HOQUE S/O ALI NEWAJ R/O VILL.- DHALAGURI POTHER PS- DHEKIAJULI DIST.- SONITPUR ASSAM. 3: MOJAFAR ALI ALIAS MONDOL S/O HASEN ALI R/O VILL.- DHALAGURI POTHER PS- DHEKIAJULI DIST.- SONITPUR ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP,ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR A ALI, MS. M KHATUN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER 24.10.2025 Heard Mr. A. Ali, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. R.J. Baruah, Page No.# 2/4 learned Addl. P.P., Assam for the State respondent. 2. This bail application has been filed by the petitioners namely, (i) Sri Phulen Borah (ii) Md. Emrajul Hoque and (iii) Mojafar Ali @ Mondol under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, seeking regular bail in connection with Dhekiajuli P.S. Case No.257/2025 under Sections 296/117(2)/196(1) of BNS, 2023. 3. The allegation against the present petitioners is that on 21.09.2025 at about 11:00 a.m., a rally was taken out upon the death of Zubeen Garg. When the members of the rally saw that some shops were open at Balijan Centre along with liquor shops, an altercation took place in course of which the petitioners, who were the shop owners, allegedly assaulted the members of the rally and uttered slang words and also hurt religious sentiment. 4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the matter has been long settled and at present, there is no enmity between the parties. 5. The injury report/case diary, as called for, has not been received and the learned Addl. P.P. prays for some time to produce the injury report. 6. However, on perusal of the forwarding report, no mention of any grievous injury having been caused is found. As per the I.O., bail objection has been made on the ground that if the accused persons are released on bail at this initial stage of investigation, then there is every possibility of them being becoming victims of mob lynching and also they could be tampering with the Page No.# 3/4 vital witnesses. 7. However, as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners, a long time has elapsed and the atmosphere in the locality is no longer what it was at that point of time and the petitioners have already been 33 days behind the bars and therefore, further, detention of the petitioners in custody may not be necessary. 8. Having regard to the rival submissions, I am of the considered view that in the facts and circumstances of the present case, further detention of the petitioners is not necessary. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is allowed. 9. Accordingly, the petitioners, named above, shall be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) each with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M., Sonitpur, Tezpur, in connection with the aforementioned case. The direction for bail is further subject to the conditions that the accused petitioners – (1) shall not hamper the investigation and tamper with the evidence of the case; and (2) shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. Page No.# 4/4 10. In terms of the above, this bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant