Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010253312025 2025:GAU-AS:15947 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3688/2025 MD JELIL AHMED AND ANR SON OF CIRAJ ALI, RESIDENT OF MECHAGARH, BURAGOHAI BARI, PO- MECHAGARH, DISTRICTSIVASAGAR, ASSAM. 2: MD HAMID ALI SON OF MD. SAMID ALI RESIDENT OF AMGURI GAON JOYSAGAR DISTRICT- SIVASAGAR ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D CHOUDHURY, MR T CHAKRABORTY,MS. A KHARBANI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS O R D E R 24.11.2025 Heard Mr. T. Chakraborty, learned Senior Counsel for the accused petitioners. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. This application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the petitioners, namely, 1. Md. Jelil Ahmed and 2. Md. Hamid Ali, has prayed for grant of bail in connection with Sivasagar P.S. Case No. 119/2025, under Sections 61(2)/305(e)/287/288/125(b) of BNS, 2023 read with Section 23 of Petroleum Act, 1934, R/W Section 3/4/5 of Explosive Substance Act, 1908, R/W Section 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 11.08.2025, one Atul Das, SI of Police had lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-Charge of Sivasagar Police Station, inter alia, alleging that on 09.08.2025 approximately at 6:30 PM, the informant received a telephonic information regarding one dumper burst while the said vehicle was being welded in the godown belonging to one Jelil Ahmed. 4. It is alleged in the FIR that 2(two) workers, namely, Muzakir Ali and Abdul Jelil sustained serious injuries in the burst and during inquiry, it was found that suspected crude oil was illegally stored in the godown constructed underground with underground chamber in order to prevent detection. Page No.# 3/3 5. Mr. T. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the petitioners fairly submits that earlier bail petition was rejected on 31.10.2025 by this Court in B.A. 3379/2025, a copy of which has been annexed. 6. The updated case diary has been received. 7. The learned Addl. P.P. fairly submits that the investigation has progressed but there are sufficient incriminating materials against the present accused persons. The petitioners were arrested on 30.08.2025 and first remanded on 31.08.2025 and it is submitted that they have completed 86 days in custody. 8. Considering the above aspect and also the progress of investigation, despite the incriminating materials revealed by the investigation - the accused persons herein are allowed to go on bail of Rs. 30,000/- each with one surety of like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, Sivasagar and subject to the following conditions that:- (i) That the accused persons shall be available to face trial, if once commences. (ii) That the accused shall not hamper or tamper with evidence. 9. In case of violation of any bail conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move a suitable application for cancellation of the bail application of the petitioner. 10. This bail application stands allowed and disposed of. 11. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant