Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010242182025 2025:GAU-AS:15721 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3558/2025 INDRASEN KUMAR YADAV S/O LATE BALA CHANDRA YADAV RESIDENT R.K. MISSION ROAD, P.S. BONGAIGAON, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE LEARNED PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P BORA, MS K SARMA,MS K BHATTACHARYYA,MR M SAHEWALLA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER Date : 19.11.2025 Heard Mr. P.Bora, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. S.H. Bora, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor. 2. This is an application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 paying for releasing on bail of the petitioner, namely; Sri Indrasen Kumar Yadav, who was arrested on 14.09.2025 in connection with Bongaigaon P.S. Case Page No.# 2/3 No.243/2025 under Section 103(1) of BNS, 2023. 3. The facts as disclosed in the FIR are that the present petitioner informed the informant that the informant’s nephew Biju Barman had been killed by three persons and was lying on the ground and also the petitioner told that he will informed the police. Thereafter, the petitioner contacted the police and informed that it was a simple case. The informant having seen the critical condition of his nephew called the ambulance. But since it did not come they took the injured to civil Hospital and thereafter to Swagat Hospital and ultimately to Gauhati Medical College (GMC) where he was declared brought dead. 4. That the petitioner states that the informant further stated that the petitioner was asked by the police as to who assaulted Biju, to which the petitioner replied that a vehicle had struck him. That the informant further stated that since a long time, the petitioner had been carrying out illicit liquor business and has been torturing Biju Barman mentally and physically and also threatened him with dire consequences. The informant stated that the petitioner assaulted the informant's nephew about 2 years back and knocked him to the ground and at the time also the informant had lodged an ejahar in New Bongaigaon Police Station but the police requested the petitioner to apologise to Biju Barman and not carry out such actions in future and thereafter, the informant were asked to withdraw their ejahar. That the informant further stated that earlier also allegedly, the petitioner had been arrested by police for carrying out liquor business and in this regard, Biju Barman would quite often ask the petitioner to shut the liquor business, because of which petitioner allegedly threatened him with dire consequences. The informant alleged that the petitioner in a planned manner killed Biju Barman and that the informant suspects that the petitioner had allegedly assaulted him with an iron rod. Page No.# 3/3 5. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that it was the petitioner himself who informed the family that the deceased was lying injured on the road side. Had the petitioner been guilty, he need not have got himself involved by informing the victims family as there were no eye witnesses to the occurrence. 6. I have perused the case diary where from it appears that there is some material against the petitioner, but they are circumstantial in nature and may not amount to a chain of circumstances. 7. In view of the above and also considering the fact that the petitioner has spent 66 days behind the bars, the prayer for bail is allowed. 8. Accordingly, it is provided that the accused petitioner, named above, shall be released on bail of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety of like amount, subject to the satisfaction of CJM, Bongaigaon in connection with the aforesaid case. 9. It is further provided that the petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation and shall not try to influence or intimidate the witnesses in any manner. 10. The bail application stands allowed and disposed of. 11. Send back the case diary JUDGE Comparing Assistant