Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010246222025 2025:GAU-AS:16668 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3649/2025 MISS PUJA RAJBONGSHI D/O KAILASH RAJBONGSHI H. NO. 4, CHANDAN PATH, SUNDARPUR, ZOO ROAD, GUWAHATI-05, DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S HOQUE, MR. M DEKA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER Date : 04.12.2025 1. Heard Mr. M Deka, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R.J Baruah, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. 2. This is an application u/s 483 BNSS, 2023 for grant of bail to the petitioner namely Miss Puja Rajbongshi in connection with Belsor P.S Case No. 83/2025 u/s 103(1)/309(6) of BNS, 2023 and added Section 61(2)(a) of BNS, 2023. Page No.# 2/3 3. The allegations as reflected in the FIR is that on 29/08/2025 at about 9-30 PM three miscreants criminally trespassed into the house of his brother-in-law namely Pramod Chandra Barman at village- Mahkholi and they tied up Pramod Chandra Barman and his wife Mira Talukdar. The informant stated that the miscreants assaulted Pramod Chandra Barman and committed dacoity and looted gold ornaments, cash rupees and some other belongings. The informant stated that due to the assault Pramod Chandra Barman died. 4. Case Diary, as called for, is not received and the petitioner, who is a student, has spent 87 days behind bars. Mr. R.J Baruah, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam has submitted that I/o has prayed for further time to produce the CD. 5. I have perused the order dated 24.10.2025 passed by the Ld. Addl. Sessions Judge, Nalbari in Criminal Misc. Case No. 135 of 2025 whereby the prayer for bail, in respect of the present petitioner, was rejected after perusal of the Case Diary. The material available in the CD is also reflected in the said order. 6. After perusal of the same, it appears that the role of the present petitioner was limited to receiving one stolen mobile phone and it is alleged that she had knowledge about the crime. Considering the aforesaid material, further detention of the petitioner is not considered necessary. 7. Accordingly, the prayer of bail is allowed. 8. The above named petitioner is allowed to go on bail of Rs. 50,000/- with 1(one) surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of concerned Ld. Trial Court. 9. It is further provided that the petitioner : (i) shall not abscond. (ii) shall be available for trial. (iii) shall not hamper the investigation or tamper with the evidence. Page No.# 3/3 (iv) shall not misuse her liberty to commit any illegal acts or offences. 10. Bail petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant