Page No.# 1/4 GAHC020000982025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH Case No. : Bail Appln./1/2025 MRS. NGUNYUBEINUO M/O KHRIETSONYU WHUORIE, R/O D KHEL, KOHIMA VILLAGE, DISTRICT KOHIMA, NAGALAND VERSUS THE STATE OF NAGALAND NAGALAND Advocate for the Petitioner : A. ZHO, AJANO,B. SOTO,AHRI Advocate for the Respondent : P.P, NAGALAND, BEFORE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 21-03-2025 1. Heard Mr. A. Zho, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. V. Zhimomi, learned Public Prosecutor for the State of Nagaland. 2. This application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by Mrs. Ngunyubeinuo, who is the mother of the accused-2, namely, Khrietsonyu Whuorie, who has been detained behind the bars since 19.05.2024, in connection with Kohima North Police Station Case No. 0045/2024, under Section Page No.# 2/4 290/352/323/325/304/34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that, on 19.05.2024, one Thejaviso B. Miasalhou had lodged an FIR before the Officer-in- charge of Kohima North Police Station, inter alia, alleging that there was an untoward incident on 18.05.2024 at Phoolbari Bus Stand/Taxi Stand opposite Oking Hospital, Kohima at around 4:40 P.M. in which the petitioner along with one Neizosetuo Kire was involved. It is also alleged in the FIR that the incident led to hospitalization of the father of the informant who had to be admitted at ICU at Oking Hospital. It is further stated in the FIR that the father of the informant succumbed to his injuries on 19.05.2024 at around 3:25 AM. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been languishing behind the bars for more than ten months. However, till date only two of the thirty nine listed prosecution witnesses have been examined. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that in the charge-sheet as well as in the statement of the witnesses recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the main accusation is levelled against the co-accused, namely, Neizosetuo Kire and it was he who had assaulted the father of the informant. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that, in the meanwhile, the informant, namely, Thejaviso B. Miasalhou has already been examined as PW-1. He also submits that in his deposition the PW-1 has implicated the co-accused of having giving fatal blow to the victim. i.e., his father and no such Page No.# 3/4 accusation has been made against the present petitioner. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready to co-operate in the trial and as there are large number of witnesses in this case, this case is unlikely to culminate soon and, hence, he prays for allowing the petitioner to go on bail on any condition which may be imposed on him. 8. On the other hand, the Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the grant of the bail to the present petitioner on the ground that though two witnesses including the first informant have been examined, however, some of the eye-witnesses as well as the son of the deceased are yet to be examined. He submits that if at this stage the accused No. 2, is released on bail, he may influence the witnesses and tamper with the evidence. 9. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the sides and have gone through the materials available on record. 10. On perusal of the records, it appears that though the charges were framed against the petitioner and the co-accused on 08.11.2024, however, till date only two out of 39 listed prosecution witnesses have been examined. 11. It also appears from record that the main accusation of assaulting the father of the informant is on the co-accused Neizosetuo Kire and the role of the petitioner was only of instigating the confrontation. 12. Under the above circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that as the informant has already been examined and also considering the nature of the accusation against the Page No.# 4/4 accused No. 2, as well as the period of detention already undergone by him i.e., more than 10 months, if he co-operates in the trial, his custodial detention may not be necessary for fair completion of the trial in G.R. Case No. 83/2024 which is pending before the Court of the Principal Sessions Judge, Kohima. 13. 13. The apprehension of the learned Public Prosecutor that the accused No. 2 may abuse his liberty and may influence the witnesses while on bail may be addressed by imposing suitable conditions while granting him bail. 14. In view of above, the accused No. 2, Khrietsonyu Whuorie is allowed to go on bail of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) with one surety of like amount subject to the satisfaction of the learned Session Judge, Kohima with following conditions:- (i) That the accused No. 2 shall regularly appear before the Trial Court as and when so required by the Trial Court, and he shall co-operate in the trial. (ii) That the accused No. 2 shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any of the listed witnesses or any other person so as to dissuade them from deposing before the Trial Court against him. 15. With the above observation, this bail application is disposed of. 16. Send back the Trial Court records. Sd/- JUDGE Comparing Assistant