Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010263602024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/3273/2024 AJGAR ALI AND 12 ORS. S/O AZAD ALI R/O VILL- RIVER BLOCK NO. 10 N.C. P.S. AND DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM 2: JABBER ALI S/O MOKRAM ALI R/O VILL- RIVER BLOCK NO. 10 N.C. P.S. AND DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM 3: SAYED ALI S/O MOGAR KHAN R/O VILL- RIVER BLOCK NO. 10 N.C. P.S. AND DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM 4: ATOWAR ALI S/O AJIT MONDAL R/O VILL- MAJERCHAR P.S. AND DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM 5: ABDUL SALAM S/O ANSER ALI R/O VILL- RIVER BLOCK NO. 10 N.C. P.S. AND DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM 6: SAHJAMAL SHEIKH S/O MOKRAM ALI R/O VILL- RIVER BLOCK NO. 10 N.C. P.S. AND DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM Page No.# 2/6 7: ABBAS ALI @ SHANTI S/O BIDDUS ALI R/O VILL- RIVER BLOCK NO. 10 N.C. P.S. AND DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM 8: ISMAIL SHEIKH S/O ENTAJ ALI R/O VILL- RIVER BLOCK NO. 10 N.C. P.S. AND DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM 9: AJIT ALI S/O ABDUL JALIL R/O VILL- RIVER BLOCK NO. 10 N.C. P.S. AND DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM 10: RIAJUL ISLAM @ RIYAJUL HOQUE S/O LT. ABDUL KADER R/O VILL- RIVER BLOCK NO. 10 N.C. P.S. AND DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM 11: RUPCHAN ALI S/O AMJAD ALI R/O VILL- RIVER BLOCK NO. 10 N.C. P.S. AND DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM 12: NAJIR HUSSAIN S/O AZAD ALI R/O VILL- RIVER BLOCK NO. 10 N.C. P.S. AND DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM 13: JURAN KHAN S/O LT. ASHAN ALI KHAN R/O VILL- RIVER BLOCK NO. 10 N.C. P.S. AND DIST. DHUBRI ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Page No.# 3/6 2:JAINUDDIN PARAMANIK S/O RAJAB ALI PARAMANIK VILL- MAJERCHAR CHALAKURA P.O. MAJERCHAR P.S. AND DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM PIN-78332 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S ISLAM, A R MONDAL,MR A HAWARI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MD M ISLAM (R2),MR. A HUSSAIN (R2),MR. R THADANI (R2),MR. A M KHAN (R2) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 27.02.2025 1. Heard Mr. S. Islam, the learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. R.J. Baruah, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam as well as Mr. A.M. Khan, the learned counsel appearing for the informant/respondent No. 2. 2. This application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the petitioners, namely, (1) Ajgar Ali, (2) Jabber Ali, (3) Sayed Ali, (4) Atowar Ali, (5) Abdul Salam, (6) Sahjamal Sheikh, (7) Abbas Ali@Shanti, (8) Ismail Sheikh, (9) Ajit Ali, (10) Riajul Islam @ Riyajul Hoque, (11) Rupchan Ali, (12) Najir Hussain and (13) Juran Khan, who are apprehending their arrest in connection with Dhubri P.S. Case No. 441/2024, under Section 61(2)(a)/189(3)/329(4)/296/65(2)/62/76/351(3) of BNS read with Section 8 of POCSO Act, 2012. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 21.11.2024, one Jainuddin Paramanik, had lodged an First Information Report (FIR) before the Officer-In- Page No.# 4/6 Charge of Dhubri Police Station, inter-alia, alleging that on 30.11.2024, a quarrel took place between the informant and the petitioners and accordingly, the informant lodged an FIR, which was registered as Dhubri P.S. Case No. 397/2024. 4. It is further stated in the FIR that on the date of filing the FIR in this case, i.e. on 21.11.2024, the accused persons trespassed into the house of the informant, armed with dangerous weapons and threatened to kill the informant and his family. 5. It is also alleged that the minor daughter of the victim-girl was threatened to be rape and the wife of the informant was disrobed and her modesty was outraged by the petitioner No. 1, namely, Ajgar Ali. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are in no way involved in the offence alleged against them in the FIR. He submits that the FIR is a concocted FIR and it is a counter blast as the petitioners got interim bail in the first FIR filed by the informant. 7. The FIR has been lodged with concocted stories. He submits that though there was some quarrel regarding matters involving ferry ghat. However, the allegation of outraging the modesty and threatening the minor girl with rape are totally false. 8. On the other hand, Mr. A.M. Khan, the learned counsel appearing for the informant/respondent No. 2 has objected to grant of anticipatory bail to the present petitioners on the ground that the petitioners have disrobed the wife of the informant and had threatened to commit rape on the minor daughter of the informant. 9. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the Case Diary of Dhubri P.S. Case No. 441/2024, however, he submits that in there the Page No.# 5/6 statement of the victim girl and the wife of the informant, recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, 2023 does not tally with the accusation made by the informant in the FIR. He also submits that the statement of the witnesses has been recorded by the Investigating Officer in the meanwhile. 10. I have considered the submissions made by the leaned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the counsel for the respondent No. 2 and have gone through the Case Diary of the Dhubri P.S. Case No. 441/2024. 11. It appears that in the FIR lodged by the informant/respondent No. 2, some exaggerations were made and the allegations are not substantiated by the statement of the victims recorded during investigation. 12. After considering the materials in the Case Diary, this Court is of considered opinion that if the petitioners to co-operate with the Investigating Officer, their custodial interrogation may not be necessary for completion of fair investigation of Dhubri P.S. Case No. 441/2024. 13. Hence, this anticipatory bail application is disposed of with a direction to the petitioners to appear before the Investigating Officer of Dhubri P.S. Case No. 441/2024, within 10(ten) days from the date of this order and cooperated in the investigation. If they do so within the stipulated period of time, in the event of their case in the aforesaid case, they shall be allowed to go on interim bail of Rs. 30,000/- each with a suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority with following conditions that:- (i) the petitioners shall co-operate in the investigation; and (ii) the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to the informant or to any other persons who may be acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from Page No.# 6/6 disclosing such facts before the Investigating Officer or to any Court. 14. With the above observations, this anticipatory bail application is hereby disposed of. 15. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant