Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010270652025 2025:GAU-AS:17677 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3996/2025 KAPIL BORAH S/O LATE NANDESWAR BORAH, R/O GORBASTI, PS DHEKIAJULI, DIST SONITPUR, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR SARFRAZ NAWAZ, MD A RAHMAN,A MISHRA,MR. SURAJIT DAS,MR. A TARAFDAR,MR A W AMAN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER Date : 18.12.2025 Heard Mr. S. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Page No.# 2/4 2. This subsequent application filed under section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraskha Sanhita, 2023, the accused petitioner namely, Kapil Borah, has prayed for bail in connection with Tamarhat P.S. Case No. 112/2025 under Section 117(2)/105 of BNS, 2023 r/w Section 98(a)/99(5) of Assam Police Act, 2007. 3. The earlier bail application was rejected after perusal of the case dairy by this Court on 25.11.2025 in BA 3675/2025. The accused is an S/I of police and he was arrested in this case on 08.10.2025. 4. The case arose out of an ejahar dated 06.10.2025 lodged by Biren Roy, father of the deceased Monohari Roy. The brief facts in a nutshell are that on 28.09.2025, in the evening, the deceased and his two friends Rakesh Roy and Ganesh Roy went to the house of one Habibul SK to supposedly collect some due amount and instead of the said person, met his father and there was some altercation and matter was informed to accused herein in the police station. It is alleged that subsequently, the three boys were brought to the police station and subjected custodial violence. Subsequently, on 01.10.2025, one of the boys, Monohari Roy expired. 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the allegations are false and the accused is not involved in any custodial violence. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner has been in custody since 08.10.2025 and perhaps investigation might have progressed in the meantime since the last date of rejection. The petitioner’s counsel reiterates that the petitioner is not involved in the allegation of causing custodial violence. The medical evidence also does not support any Page No.# 3/4 allegation being responsible causing the death of the victim. 6. The up-to-date case diary has been received. 7. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that PM report does not reveal injuries but the liver was found to be enlarged. The statement of the autopsy doctor also available in which he stated that when the body was received, no external injury was observed, except brown fluid was coming out from his mouth. He has also mentioned about the deceased suffering from some pre-existing decease pertaining to liver by way of chronic liver cirrhosis caused by excessive alcoholism. The FSL report has tested positive for carbonate poisoning; however, the investigation has indicated that there was no sign of forceful feeding of such chemical. 8. The last endorsement in the case diary is on 20.11.2025. Thus, I find there is no investigation after the last date of rejection. It is submitted by the learned Addl.P.P. that the statement of the other two persons who are brought to the police station in this case have not implicated the accused. 9. Nevertheless, considering the length of detention as on date and the fact that the there is no investigation after the date of last rejection and also considering the other aspect indicated above – I am of the considered view that he can be released on bail at this stage, subject to conditions. 10. Accordingly, the accused-petitioner, named above, shall be released on bail in connection with Tamarhat P.S. Case No. 112/2025 under Section 117(2)/105 of BNS, 2023 r/w Section 98(a)/99(5) of Assam Police Act, 2007, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.40,000/- with one suitable surety of Page No.# 4/4 the like amount to the satisfaction of learned concerned court. 11. The direction for bail is further subject to the following conditions: (a) That the petitioner shall be available for the remaining investigation; (b) That the petitioner shall not hamper or tamper with evidence; (c) That the petitioner shall not intimidate or harass the family members of the victim; and (d) That the petitioner shall not try to influence witnesses. 12. Violation or breach of any condition(s) shall entail cancellation of bail. 13. With the above observations, this bail petition stands allowed and disposed of accordingly. 14. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant