Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010231692025 2025:GAU-AS:15471 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3400/2025 NAIB ALI @ NAYAB ALI AND 4 ORS S/O- LATE RUSTOM ALI, R/O NO 1 BORGHULI, PO- ULUANI, DIST- NAGAON 2: RASHIDA KHATUN @ RAHIMA KHATUN C/O- NAIB ALI R/O NO 1 BORGHULI PO ULUWANI DIST NAGAON 3: RAFIKUL ISLAM @ RAFIQUL ISLAM C/O- NAIB ALI R/O NO 1 BORGHULI PO ULUANI DIST NAGAON 4: EJAJUL HOQUE @ IZAZUL HAQUE S/O- NAIB ALI R/O NO 1 BORGHULI PO ULUANI DIST NAGAON 5: SAIFUL ISLAM S/O- NAIB ALI R/O NO 1 BORGHULI PO ULUANI DIST NAGAO VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Page No.# 2/5 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H R A CHOUDHURY, MS. A SULTANA,MR. SAYED SALIM AHMED,M. HOSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 14.11.2025 1. Heard HRA Choudhury, the learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr. M. Hossain for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. M.P. Goswami, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the State of Assam. 2. This application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita(BNSS), 2023 has been filed by the petitioners, namely, 1. Naib Ali @ Nayab Ali, 2. Rashida Khatun @ Rahima Khatun, 3. Rafikul Islam @ Rafiqul Islam, 4. Ejajul Hoque @ Izazul Hoque and 5. Saiful Islam, who are detained behind the bars since 13.06.2025 (for the last more than 5 months), in connection with Sessions (T1) Case No. 26/2025, corresponding to Uluani P.S. Case No. 52/2023. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners prior to approaching before this Court by filing the instant bail application had approached this Court by filing an anticipatory bail application when the trial court had issued non-bailable warrant of arrest against them. Page No.# 3/5 4. He further submits that the said case, was disposed of on 04.06.2025 by this court on AB Case No. 1125/2025, whereby non-bailable warrant of arrest issued against the petitioners was stayed and the petitioners were directed to appear before the trial court on the next date fixed. Accordingly, the learned Senior Counsel further submits that accordingly, the petitioners appeared before the trial court and prayed for bail. However, their prayer was rejected and they were remanded to custody and since 13.06.2025 they have been languishing behind the bars. 5. He submits that in the instant case, though accusation against the petitioners has been made of causing death of the victim woman and her child due to torture. However, the trial court has framed under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and in alternative under Section 304 B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 6. The learned Senior Counsel further submits that the entire family members has been put behind the bars and therefore, it has become difficult on their part to properly defend the case. 7. He submits that the petitioners are ready to co-operate in the trial and abide by any condition imposed by this court while imposed by this court while granting bail to them. 8. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioners, Page No.# 4/5 on the ground that a mother and her child had to end their life because of the torture perpetrated by the present petitioners. He submits that there are sufficient materials in the record which indicates that the petitioners had subjected the victim woman to torture which led to cause her death. 9. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and have gone through the materials on record. Without commenting on the merit of this case, this court is of the considered opinion that since the petitioners have surrendered before the trial court, in pursuant to the directions given by this court and for the last five months entire families are behind the bars, it would be naturally difficult on their part to properly defend themselves in the trial, which they are facing while remaining in custody. Since the investigation has been completed and the petitioners are ready to co-operate in the trial, this court is of the considered opinion if they abide by the conditions imposed by this court while granting bail to them, there may not be any necessity of further custodial detention for fair completion of the trial of Sessions (T1) Case No. 26/2025, 10. For the reasons stated herein above, the above- named petitioners are allowed to go on bail of Rs. 30,000/- each with a suitable surety of like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 3, Nagaon with following conditions:- Page No.# 5/5 I. That the petitioners shall cooperate in the trial of Sessions (T1) Case No. 26/2025, corresponding to Uluani P.S. Case No. 52/2023 under Sections 302/34 IPC, 1860; II.That the petitioners shall appear before the trial court as and when so required by the trial court; and III. That the petitioners 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 before the trial court in the trial pending against the present petitioners. 11. With the above observation, this bail application is accordingly, disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant