Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 25743 (GAU)

SRI SANJAY DEKA v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

AB/2453/2025 · 2025-11-19

Sanjeev Kumar Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010226782025 2025:GAU-AS:15819 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2453/2025 SRI SANJAY DEKA SON OF LAKSHYADHAR DEKA, R/O VILLAGE NO. 1 SORIKOT, P.O. KAMALPUR P.S. KAMALPUR, DIST. KAMRUP, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M I HUSSAIN, R KHA,MS. P AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER 20.11.2025 Heard Mr. M.I Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K K Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. The bail application has been filed by the petitioner namely, Sri Sanjay Page No.# 2/3 Deka, under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, seeking pre-arrest bail to the petitioners in connection with Kamalpur P.S Case No. 111/2025 under Sedtions 126(2)/118(2)/109/3(5) BNS. 3. The informant is the father of the petitioner and the brother of the accused No. 1. The allegation is that on the day of occurrence, the accused No. 1, at the instigation of the petitioner, attacked the informant and struck him on different parts of the body with sharp weapon, causing severe injuries, whereafter the informant became senseless. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the he had only intervened to separate accused No. 1 from the informant. 4. On perusal of the CD, it is seen that the informant has implicated of the accused persons and there are other witnesses who have stated similarly. The medical report indicates one grievous injury i.e., a fracture of the left forearm, while the others were injuries in simple in nature. 5. Considering the fact that the allegation of assault is primarily against accused No. 1 and no specific allegation of the present petitioner assaulting the informant is available, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner does not appear be necessary. 6. Having regard to the above, the above-named petitioner is allowed pre- arrest bail and in the event of his arrest, he shall be allowed to go on bail of Rs. 20,000/- only with one surety of like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the arresting authority. The petitioner shall appear before the I.O. within a period of 7 days and shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses. Page No.# 3/3 7. The bail petition stands disposed of. 8. Send back the CD. JUDGE Comparing Assistant