Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010253412025 2025:GAU-AS:15558 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3701/2025 ALAKESH DAS S/O- ATUL DAS, PERMANENT RESIDENT OF VILL.- NIZ PAKOWA,P.S-. BELSOR, DISTRICT- NALBARI, ASSAM,PRESENTLY RESIDING AT BARPATHAR, PATHARQUARY, BASISTHA, P.S.- KHANAPARA,DIST. - KAMRUP (M), PIN - 781029 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. T SOM, MS. A MAHANTA,R K SHARMA,MS. S SUT,B. DAS,MS. U HAZARIKA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER Date : 18-11-2025 Heard Ms. T. Som, learned counsel for the accused applicant and Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. 2. This is an application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of bail to the accused applicant in connection with the Basistha P.S. Case No. 550/2025 under Sections 132/121(1)/324(4)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023. 3. An FIR dated 07.11.2025 was filed before the Basistha Mandir Patrol Post Page No.# 2/3 by one ASI namely, Earjest Lotha, alleging that on 07.11.2025 at about 1:00 am, while ASI Earjest Lotha was executing patrolling duty at Basistha Borpathar area, he noticed one suspicious man coming from Basistha side on foot, carrying an airbag. On suspicion, he instructed him to stop but the aforesaid person i.e. the accused applicant tried to flee away from there and he called some of his own people. Thereafter, some other people came to the place of occurrence on One DI vehicle and a scooty and they assaulted the informant, whereby the informant got some injuries. 4. In view of the aforesaid FIR, the Police registered the Basistha P.S. Case No. 550/2025 under Sections 132/121(1)/ 324(4)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023. 5. Ms. T. Som, learned counsel for the accused applicant submits that the accused applicant was arrested on 10.11.2025 and since then, he is behind the bar. Learned counsel further submits that the accused applicant is no way linked with the alleged incident of assaulting the informant i.e. the ASI Earjest Lotha. She submits that the accused applicant is, in fact, was working as a delivery man in a logistic company and he was returning home. At that point of time, the informant stopped him and started asking certain questions to which he duly answered. She further submits that the Police has seized the suspected airbag from him and nothing was found. She further submits that however, surprisingly, in the seizure list, some Kakhi colour Police uniform, name plate of ASI Earjest Lotha and other goods were mentioned to be found in the airbag recovered from the informant. She submits that the seizure has nothing to do with the accused applicant. She, therefore, submits that the whole incident is a fabricated one and therefore, prays that the accused applicant be granted bail. 6. Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, on the other hand, submits that the accused applicant has assaulted the police men on Page No.# 3/3 duty and subsequently, his bail application was also rejected by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kamrup (Metro), after considering the aforesaid facts and in view of the same, he objected to grant of bail to the accused applicant at this stage. 7. This Court has gone through the materials brought on record and also heard the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties. 8. Considering the fact that the accused applicant, who is stated to be a medically disabled person, as well as, taking into consideration of the alleged seizure list, this Court finds that this is a fit case wherein the accused applicant should be granted privilege of bail. Accordingly, it is directed that the accused applicant shall be released forthwith on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with surety of one like amount to the satisfaction of the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kamrup (Metro) subject to the following conditions: i. that the accused applicant shall cooperate with the investigation and trial of the case; ii. that the accused applicant shall not hamper or tamper with the evidence or investigation of the case; iii. that the accused applicant shall appear before the I.O. of the case, as and when call for. 9. In view of the above, the bail application stands disposed of as allowed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant