Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010242902025 2025:GAU-AS:15151 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3551/2025 ABED ALI S/O -ASMAN ALI VILL.- NAYERALGA PART IV, P.S.- BILASIPARA DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE P.P. ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N J DUTTA, MR A ALAM,MR. B HUSSAIN,MR R A AHMED,MR. A A MONDAL Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER 10.11.2025 1. Heard Mr. N.J. Dutta, learned counsel for the accused applicant. Also heard Mr. J. Chutia, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the accused applicant, namely, Abed Ali, praying for grant of bail in connection with Bilasipara P.S Case No.322/2025 registered under Sections 196(1)(a)/197(1)(a)/152 of BNS, 2023, corresponding to GR Case No.536/2025. 3. An FIR was lodged by one Hirak Jyoti Khound, S.I(P), Nayeralga OP Bilasipara before the Officer-in-Charge alleging that the accused applicant has posted a message in social media i.e. Facebook which has potential of creating disharmony between the communities and religions and thereby, causing disturbance in public peace at large. 4. Accordingly, the aforesaid case was registered and the accused applicant was arrested on 11.10.2025. 5. The accused applicant is in judicial custody for the last 31 days. 6. The learned counsel for the accused applicant submits that the post on the Facebook, which was allegedly done by the accused Page No.# 3/4 applicant does not attract the Sections, that have been invoked against the accused applicant. 7. The learned counsel for the accused applicant further submits that the post was made only to seek justice for the late singer Zubeen Garg and it does not have any connection or further intention to create any kind of disharmony or disturbance in the society. 8. The learned counsel for the accused applicant further submits that since the accused applicant has already spent 31 days in the judicial custody, further detention in this matter is absolutely not required and therefore, he prays that the accused applicant should be allowed to go on bail. 9. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, on the other hand, submits that case record reveals certain incriminating materials against the accused applicant and therefore, at this stage, the accused applicant should not be granted bail. 10. This Court has gone through the materials available in the case diary submitted before this Court as well as heard the submissions made by the respective counsels appearing for the parties. 11. After hearing the parties and after considering the whole matter in its entirety and looking into the aspect that the accused applicant has already spent 31 days in judicial custody, this Court is of the considered opinion that further custodial detention in the instant case may not be required. Page No.# 4/4 12. In view of the aforesaid, it is directed that the above-named accused applicant shall be released forthwith from jail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) only with one surety of like nature subject to the satisfaction of the Court of learned SDJM (M), Bilasipara with following conditions: (i) That the accused applicant shall co-operate with the investigation as and when required; (ii) That the accused applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person who may be acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts of the case before the Investigating Officer; (iii) That the accused applicant shall not hamper or tamper with evidence. 13. In view of the aforesaid, this bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant