Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 24612 (GAU)

JUSHNA BEGUM v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

Bail Appln./3473/2025 · 2025-11-05

Sanjeev Kumar Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010235522025 2025:GAU-AS:14983 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3473/2025 JUSHNA BEGUM W/O MAJID ALI R/O HOUSE NO 5, BYE LANE NO 1, GOLDEN PATH, BHETAPARA, PO AND PS HATIGAON, DISTRICT KAMRUP (M), ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S H SIKDAR, MS N J BEGUM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER Date : 06-11-2025 Heard Mr. S.H. Sikdar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D.P. Goswami, learned Addl. P.P., Assam for the State respondent. 2. This bail application has been filed by the petitioner namely, Jushna Page No.# 2/3 Begum under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, seeking bail in connection with Dispur P.S. Case No.771/2025 under Sections 140(1)/3(5) of BNS, 2023. 3. The case diary, as called for, has not been received. 4. The allegations as contained in the FIR is that on 13.09.2025 at around 9.30 p.m., the accused person namely Majid Ali @ Rajib along with other 3/4 persons had kidnapped one Rajnish Kumar @ Raja, from Beltola Market. The same was informed to the police station on 13.09.2025 at about 11 pm. As there was no information about Rajnish Kumar, the informant suspected that the kidnappers have done something wrong to him. 5. It is submitted that the allegation is against the husband of the petitioner, who is a lady, having two minor children and no such involvement on her part is reflected in the FIR and in the meantime, she has already spent 52 days in custody. It is also submitted that the victim has already been recovered and his statement has been recorded. 6. Having regard to the above, the prayer for bail is allowed. 7. Accordingly, it is provided that the petitioner, named above, shall be released on bail of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Eleka Magistrate in connection with the aforementioned case. 8. The direction for bail is further subject to the conditions that the accused Page No.# 3/3 petitioner – (1) shall cooperate in the investigation; and (2) shall not try to hamper with the evidence of the case or influence the witnesses. 9. In terms of the above, this bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant