Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010256552025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/1245/2025 SRI SANJOY CHANDRA BHADRA S/O SRI NIRMAL CHANDRA BHADRA, R/O-VILL AND P.O.- KHAIRABARI, P.S.- BARPETA ROAD, DIST- BARPETA, ASSAM, PIN-781315. 2: SRI RAJU DAS S/O SUBAL DAS R/O-TOWN- BARPETA ROAD BELTOLA WARD NO. 1 P.S.- BARPETA ROAD DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781315. 3: SRI BARUN DAS S/O SUBAL DAS R/O-TOWN- BARPETA ROAD BELTOLA WARD NO. 1 P.S.- BARPETA ROAD DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781315. 4: SRI SANJOY PAUL ALIAS GHATU PAUL S/O SWAPAN PAUL R/O-TOWN- BARPETA ROAD BELTOLA WARD NO. 1 P.S.- BARPETA ROAD DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781315. 5: SRI SAJAL SARKAR Page No.# 2/5 S/O KAMAKSHYA SARKAR R/O-VILL AND P.O.- KHAIRABARI P.S.- BARPETA ROAD DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781315. 6: SRI KAMAL MONDAL S/O SRI KALIPADA MANDAL R/O-VILL AND P.O.- KHAIRABARI P.S.- BARPETA ROAD DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781315. 7: SRI NITYA GOPAL SUTRADHAR ALIAS NITYANANDA ALIAS NITYA S/O RADHA BALLAV SUTRADHAR R/O-VILL AND P.O.- KHAIRABARI P.S.- BARPETA ROAD DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781315. 8: SRI SANJOY SUTRADHAR S/O HAREKRISHNA SUTRADHAR R/O-VILL AND P.O.- KHAIRABARI P.S.- BARPETA ROAD DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781315. 9: SRI NIRANJAN SAHA MONA SAHA S/O SATYA SAHA R/O-VILL AND P.O.- KHAIRABARI P.S.- BARPETA ROAD DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781315. 10: SRI ARUN DAS S/O SUBAL DAS R/O-TOWN- BARPETA ROAD BELTOLA WARD NO. 1 P.S.- BARPETA ROAD DIST- BARPETA ASSAM Page No.# 3/5 PIN-781315. 11: SRI SANJOY DAS S/O SATYEN DAS R/O-TOWN- BARPETA ROAD BELTOLA WARD NO. 1 P.S.- BARPETA ROAD DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781315. 12: SRI TARUN DAS S/O SRI KANAILAL DAS R/O-VILL AND P.O.- KHAIRABARI P.S.- BARPETA ROAD DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781315. 13: SRI BITTU SAHA S/O PRAN GOPAL SAHA R/O-TOWN- BARPETA ROAD BELTOLA WARD NO. 1 P.S.- BARPETA ROAD DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781315 VERSUS STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S K SINGHA, MR G PATHAK Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, in Crl.Pet. Case No. 1394/2025(D/O) Page No.# 4/5 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 18.11.2025 1. Heard Mr. G. Pathak, the learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam. 2. This interlocutory application has been filed by the petitioners, in connection with Criminal Petition No. 1394/2025, praying for rectification of certain inadvertent typographical mistake which has crept in the order as same typographical mistakes were there in the criminal petitions also. 3. He submits that in the Criminal Petition No. 1394/2025 as well as order dated 14.11.2025 passed therein, the name of the petitioner No. 4 has been wrongly typed as “Sri Sanjoy Paul @ Ghata Paul,” whereas, it ought to have been “Sanjoy Paul @ Ghatu Paul.” 4. He further submits that similarly, the name of the petitioner No. 9 has only been reflected as “Sri Niranjan Saha,” whereas, it should have been reflected as “Sri Niranjan Saha @ Mona Saha.” 5. He further submits that the name of the father of the petitioner No. 11, “Sri Sanjoy Das” has been wrongly mentioned as Subal Das, whereas it should have been “Satyen Das.” 6. He also submits that in paragraph No. 3 of the said order in line No. 2 instead of the word ‘rioting’, the word ‘writing’ has been mistakenly typed out. Page No.# 5/5 7. Same needs to be rectified. 8. I have gone through the records of Criminal Petition No. 1394/2025 as well as the impugned order. The errors pointed out by the learned counsel for the applicant appears to be inadvertent typographical mistakes which need to be rectified. 9. Accordingly, same is rectified. 10. The name of the petitioner No. 4 in the order dated 14.11.2025 in Criminal Petition No. 1394/2025 shall be read as “Sanjoy Paul @ Ghatu Paul” instead of Sri Sanjoy Paul @ Ghata Paul. Similarly, the name of the petitioner No. 9 shall be read as Sri Niranjan Saha @ Mona Saha.” Similarly, the father’s name of the petitioner No. 11 shall be read as “Satyen Das”, instead of “Subal Das.” 11. Further, in paragraph No. 3 of the aforesaid order, the word ‘writing’ appearing in line No. 2 shall be read as ‘rioting’. 12. With the above observations, this interlocutory application is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant