Page No. 1/2 GAHC010286232025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/1398/2025 AHMED HUSSAIN SON OF LOKMAN ALI, RESIDENT OF MANIPUR, PART-1, P.O. AND P.S.- BOGRIBARI, DISTRICT- KOKRAJHAR, ASSAM. PIN CODE- 783349. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM 2:HABIBUR RAHMAN S/O- LATE JINNER UDDIN R/O- VILL.- SHOLMARI P.O- SHOLMARI AND P.S.- BILASIPARA DIST.- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN.-78330 Advocate for the Petitioner : MS S CHAKRABORTY, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER Date : 19.01.2026 [Manish Choudhury, J.] Heard Ms. S. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the applicant-appellant and Mr. R.R. Kaushik, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the opposite part-respondent no. 1, State of Assam. Page No. 2/2 The applicant as the appellant has preferred the accompanying criminal appeal under Section 415, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraskha Sanhita [BNSS], 2023 to assail a Judgment and Order dated 14.02.2025 passed by the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Kokrajhar [‘the Trial Court’, for short] in Sessions Case no. T1/72/2019. By the Judgment and Order dated 14.02.2025, the applicant-appellant has been convicted for the offence of murder under Section 302, Indian Penal Code [IPC] and he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-, with default stipulation. This interlocutory application is preferred by the applicant-appellant to strike out the name of the opposite party no. 2, who has been arrayed as respondent no. 2 in the accompanying criminal appeal, on the ground that the prosecution is represented by the State and impleadment of the opposite party-respondent no. 2 who was the informant, is not necessary. Mr. Kaushik, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the opposite party-respondent no. 2 has submitted that since the State had prosecuted, the informant would not be a necessary party. In view of the above submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, the instant interlocutory application stands allowed, thereby, allowing the prayer of the applicant- appellant for striking off the name of the opposite party-respondent no. 2 from the array of respondents in the accompanying criminal appeal. The Registry to carry out the necessary correction. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant