Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010203002025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2281/2025 SRI REJJAK KHAN AND 5 ORS. SON OF MAFEJ KHAN, R/O VILLAGE FULBARI, P.O. GUMAFULBARI, P.S. TARABARI, DIST. BARPETA, ASSAM, PIN-781302 2: SRI OMAR FARUK KHAN SON OF AJMAL KHAN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BARBARADI BHELLA P.O. BELLA P.S. TARABARI DIST. BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781309. 3: SRI HASEN ALI SON OF JOYNAL MIAH R/O VILLAGE BALAPARA P.O. BAR GHOL P.S. TARABARI DIST. BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781302. 4: SRI RAFIZUL KHAN SON OF RAHIM KHAN R/O VILLAGE BALAPARA P.O.BAR GHOL P.S. TARABARI DIST. BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781302. 5: SRI RAFIJUL ISLAM KHAN SON OF GARJAN KHAN Page No.# 2/4 R/O VILLAGE BALAPARA P.O. BAR GHOL P.S. TARABARI DIST. BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781302 6: SRI LLAHAM MIAH SON OF ALAUDDIN MIYA R/O VILLAGE BALAPARA P.O. GUMAFULBARI P.S. TARABARI DIST. BARPETA ASSAM PIN-78130 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A A R KARIM, S A KHAN,ASRAB ALI,MD S A MONDAL,MR. A DEB Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER 03.11.2025 Heard Mr. A.A.R. Karim, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. D.P. Goswami, learned Addl. P.P., Assam appearing for the State respondent. 2. This application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioners, namely, (i) Rejjak Khan (ii) Omar Faruk Khan (iii) Hasen Ali (iv) Rafizul Khan (v) Rafijul Islam Khan and (vi) Llaham Miah seeking Page No.# 3/4 pre-arrest bail in connection with Barpeta P.S. Case No. 301/2025 under Sections 191(3)/132/121(2)/109/ 118(2)/126(2)/324(5) of BNS, 2023 (corresponding to G.R. Case No.938/2025). 3. The allegation against the petitioners is that when the Police officials from Barpeta P.S., upon receipt of information regarding the presence of a cyber criminal in Village Tilapara visited the spot and apprehended the petitioner No.2, a huge crowd gathered and attacked the Police personnel with sharp weapons to secure the release of the petitioner No.2 and caused grievous injuries upon the Police personnel. They also tried to snatch away the arms from the Police personnel and attacked them with stones and bricks. 4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that nothing more than an altercation took place between the village people and the Police, but the Police have fabricated a different story. 5. The learned Addl. P.P. submits that the allegations against the petitioners are very serious, as they attacked Police personnel, who had gone to discharge their lawful duties and caused injuries to them. 6. Although the medical report indicates only simple injury and most of the other offences are bailable, there is sufficient material in the case diary regarding the allegations of attacking Police personnel in discharging of their public duty which is indeed a serious one and a lenient approach in this regard would send a wrong signal to the society. 7. In my considered opinion, this is not a fit case for granting the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners. Page No.# 4/4 8. Accordingly, the prayer for pre-arrest bail is rejected and the petition stands dismissed. 9. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant