Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010228872025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3320/2025 SRI PUNESWAR KALITA AND ANR SON OF LATE NANESWAR KALITA R/O NAPAMUA GAON, P.S. PULIBOR, DIST. JORHAT, ASSAM 2: SRI ABINASH KAKOTI SON OF KIRAN KAKOTI R/O NAPAMUA GAON P.S. PULIBOR DIST. JORHAT ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P KATAKI, MS S BARPUJARI,MRS R BEGUM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 11.11.2025 1. Heard Mr. P. Kataki, the learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. This application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioners, namely, (1) Sri Puneswar Kalita and (2) Sri Abinash Kakoti, who are detained behind the bars since 25.08.2025 for the last 70 days in connection with Pulibor P. S. Case No. 110/2025 read with Sections 103/3(5) of BNS, 2023. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 25.08.2025 one Smt. Chitralekha had lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-Charge of Pulibor Police Station, inter-alia alleging that during inquiry conducted in respect of Pulibor U/D Case No. 12/2025 it came to the notice of Enquiry Officer that the deceased Tarun Baruah who had expired on 17.08.2025 suffered anti mortem head injuries caused by blunt force impact and it was found that at the time of sustaining the said injuries the present petitioners and one Kalyan Kakoti and some others were there in the resident of the Tarun Baruah. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though the case was initially registered under Section 103 of BNSS, 2023 however, no ingredient of the said offence is there whether in the FIR or other materials on record. Page No.# 3/4 5. He further submits that in the chargesheet it has been laid under Section 105/3(5) of BNS, 2023, it is clearly indicated that there is no witnesses implicating the present petitioners of any assault or any act by which resulted into the death of the deceased rather it is revealed during investigation that there was an altercation between the accused persons and one Amrit Baruah and when the deceased tried to interfere in the same, he fell down and hit a bamboo post sustained injury on his head. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are detained behind the bars since 28.08.2025 and they are ready to cooperate in the trial. 7. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor also submitted on similar lines as regards the facts stated by the learned counsel for the petitioners. 8. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties as well as the nature of offence involved in this case and the period of detention undergone by the petitioners in this case, this court is of the considered opinion that if the above named petitioners cooperate in the trial, their further custodial detention may not be necessary for fair completion of the trial. 9. Hence, both the above named petitioners are allowed to go on bail of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) each only with one surety of like amount subject to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jorhat with the following conditions:- i. The petitioners shall co-operate in the investigation; Page No.# 4/4 ii. The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to the informant or to other person who may be acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts before the Investigating Officer or to any Court. 10. With the above observations, this bail application is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant