Page No.# 1/11 GAHC040019712025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : BA/147/2025 Smti Tadar Yasi, aged about 59 years, W/o Lt. Tadar Taping, a permanent resident of Village Laba, P.O./P.S. Nyapin, Kurung Kumey District, presently residing at Village Kangko, P.O./P.S. Chimpu, Papum Pare District, Arunachal Pradesh. ...... Applicant – VERSUS – 1. The State of Arunachal Pradesh, represented through the Public Prosecutor. ........ Respondent Advocates for the Applicant : Mr. H. Appe Advocates for the Respondent : Mr. D. Loyi, P.P. Page No.# 2/11 :::BEFORE::: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER Dated: 08.12.2025 Heard Mr. H. Aape, learned counsel for the accused applicant. Also heard Mr. D. Loyi, learned Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This is an application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, praying for release of the accused person on bail in connection with Chimpu P.S. Case No. 47/2025, under Section 103(1) of BNS, 2023. 3. The gist of the allegation, as narrated in the FIR dated 16.07.2025, is that on the same day, at around 2:00 AM, the informant’s eldest son, Tadar Tagar, came to the informant’s residence in a drunken state and, without any provocation, started shouting and abusing the informant, thereby created a disturbance in the house. It was alleged that thereafter, the said Tadar Tagar went to the room of the informant’s younger son, Tagar Tani, and started shouting his name and abusing him with filthy language, disturbing the entire family and spoiling the otherwise peaceful atmosphere at home. 4. It is further alleged that at the time of the incident, the accused person, Tadar Niting, was awake and preparing for his second-semester examination scheduled for the next morning, i.e., 16.07.2025. It was also stated that the informant’s daughter was awake and studying for her Arunachal Pradesh Engineering Services Examination to be held on 27.07.2025. It was alleged that Page No.# 3/11 the aforesaid Tadar Tagar then engaged in a fight with the younger son, Tadar Niting. Finding no other means to stop the quarrel, the informant went out to call her relatives for help. However, upon her return, she was informed that the accused person, Tadar Niting had killed his elder brother i.e., Tadar Tagar. 5. It is the case of the applicant that her eldest son, Tadar Tagar was a habitual drinker and he used to live separately in another house adjacent to the informant’s residence, whereas the informant along with her other sons and daughters were staying in the other house. It is stated that the deceased used to come the informant’s home in an intoxicated condition, and thereby, causing disturbances and irritation to her and her other children who are usually remained occupied with their studies. 6. It is further stated that on the day of occurrence, the deceased Tadar Tagar again came home in a drunken state and started kicking the doors and walls of the room where the accused, Tadar Niting was studying for his examination, which was scheduled for the next morning. The accused intervened to pacify and restrain his elder brother and requested him to return and come back in a sober state the next day. However, the deceased did not listen to any such advice and instead, began quarrelling with him. It is further stated that the deceased, thereafter, assaulted the accused, resulting in a physical scuffle between the two. The deceased then ran towards the kitchen, shouting that he would kill his brother grabbed a machete (dao) which was kept in the kitchen. Fearing for his life and believing that his intoxicated brother might harm anyone with the weapon, the accused rushed after him in an attempt to physically restrain and tried to dis-arm. It is further alleged that finding no other way, the informant went out to call her relatives to stop the Page No.# 4/11 fight and, upon returning, she was informed that the accused had killed his elder brother. It is stated that during the scuffle, both brothers fell off the kitchen balcony, but the fight continued, and in an act of self-defense and in order to protect his life, the accused managed to snatch the machete (dao) and, in the heat of the moment, struck his brother, resulting in his death. 7. It is the case of the applicant that the accused, Tadar Niting is 22 years of age, and a meritorious student with good behaviour, and had secured 76.6% marks in Class XII from Government Higher Secondary School, Naharlagun. He also obtained a first class in graduation from Dera Natung Government College, Itanagar. After his graduation, he had secured himself admission in Rajiv Gandhi University for higher studies but due to financial constraints, he could not join. Subsequently, he enrolled in the Master’s Degree programme under the Centre for Distance Education at Rajiv Gandhi University. 8. It is the case of the applicant that her son i.e., the accused has always been a person of good conduct, without any criminal antecedents, and has been pursuing his studies diligently with the aim of securing a good career and a better life ahead. 9. The learned counsel appearing for the accused applicant submits that the unfortunate incident occurred due to sudden provocation by the deceased, who was the elder brother of the accused. He submits that there was no intention on the part of the accused to commit the murder of his elder brother and that the incident happened in a fit of rage following a sudden and extreme provocation from the fully intoxicated elder brother i.e., the deceased. Page No.# 5/11 10. The learned counsel submits that the accused was arrested on 16.07.2025. After completion of the investigation, the Investigating Agency has filed the charge-sheet No. 84/2025 on 09.10.2025, under Section 103(1) of the BNS, 2023.He further submits that in the charge-sheet also, it has specifically been mentioned that in the unfortunate fight between the two brothers, in the heat of the moment and in panic, the accused struck the deceased multiple times until the deceased collapsed. It is further submitted that it was also mentioned in the charge-sheet that after realizing what had happened, the accused was shocked with full of remorse, immediately informed his mother and sisters about the unfortunate death of his elder brother. 11. Learned counsel submits that the accused voluntarily appeared before the Chimpu Police Station on 16.07.2025 at 9:30 AM and confessed to having killed his brother. He submits that in the charge-sheet, it has specifically been mentioned that the accused himself admitted that due to persistent disturbances and repeated provocation by his intoxicated elder brother, he was compelled to assault him, which unfortunately resulted in fatal injuries on his elder brother. 12. Learned counsel for the accused applicant submits that the accused was arrested on 16.07.2025 and is languishing in jail for more than 140 days. He submits that because of his prolonged detention, the accused had to discontinue his studies and could not appear in his examination. Learned counsel submits that the accused has remained in custody for more than 4 (four) months and his continued detention is adversely affecting his education and future prospects. The learned counsel submits that taking into account the conduct and behaviour of the accused, both before pre and post occurrence of Page No.# 6/11 the incident as well as his young age of 22 years, this Court should consider him to be released on bail at this stage. He also submits that since the trial has already commenced and all the witnesses mentioned in the charge-sheet, are family members of both the accused and the deceased, there is no question of any tampering, influencing, or intimidating any of the witnesses. 13. He submits that though a bail application was moved before the learned Trial Court, the same was rejected on 30.04.2025 by the learned Court of Sessions Judge, Yupia, solely on the ground that in the event of release of the accused on bail, there is a possibility of hampering or tampering with the prosecution witnesses, who are close relatives of the accused person. 14. The learned counsel for the accused applicant, in support of his plea for grant of bail, has relied upon the decision in the case of Tejas Shamsunder Shinde Vs. State of Maharashtra (Bail Application No. 544 of 2024) decided on 30.05.2025 by the High Court of Bombay. To support his arguments, he submits that the accused herein is a person of good character, and he committed the offence in a sheer fit of anger due to grave and sudden provocation by the deceased. He submits that this aspect should be considered while considering the bail application of the accused person, who is also a young person of 22 years old. 15. Mr. D. Loyi, learned P.P. appearing for the State, submits that since none of the prosecution witnesses have been examined by the Trial Court as yet, at this stage, the bail should not be granted to the accused, who has been alleged to have committed the heinous offence of murdering his elder brother. Page No.# 7/11 16. This Court has considered the relevant facts as well as perused the materials available on record. It is seen that the accused person is of 22 years old and has no previous criminal antecedents. In fact, the accused person is a sincere and meritorious student who secured good marks in his Higher Secondary and Graduation examinations and was preparing for his MA semester examination scheduled the next morning of the date of occurrence of the alleged murder. 17. The record further reveals that the otherwise peaceful environment at home was disturbed by the conduct of the deceased, who came to the house at 2:00 AM in a fully intoxicated condition and started abusing the accused, his mother and his sister without any reason while both the siblings were studying. The materials also show that the informant, who is the mother of both the accused and the deceased, was assaulted by the deceased on the same night while he was under the influence of alcohol. 18. Another relevant circumstance is that the deceased was not staying in the same house; rather he was staying separately with his wife in a nearby house. He voluntarily came to the house of the informant and the accused at wee hours of the night in a drunken state and created an unwarranted situation in their home. The records further show that there was no provocation from the side of the accused, rather the accused got into scuffle when the deceased continued his abuses and aggressive behaviour. In fact, the machete (dao) was picked up by the deceased himself from the kitchen and threatened to kill the accused. It was in this situation that a tussle ensued, during which both fell off the balcony to the ground beside the house. Page No.# 8/11 19. Thus, it prima facie appears that there was a grave and sudden provocation on the part of the deceased which compelled the accused to engage in a physical confrontation, ultimately resulting in the unfortunate death of the deceased. 20. This Court has also considered the case law that has been cited by the learned counsel for the accused applicant. 21. The following paragraphs 23, 24, and 25 of the aforesaid case being relevant in the instant case are extracted hereinbelow: “ 23. Before me is the case of a young offender and as held above his exclusion from the normal educational stream for a period of time brings about unpleasant consequences and harm which in any case amongst others is the purpose of any punishment. The Applicant before me has admitted the act by himself walking to the Police Station giving information to the Police. He could have even run away had be been of a different criminal tendency. At this stage, I am not considering its evidentiary value. The confessional statement when read would show that the Petitioner is contrite. He is a young adult offender. He clearly falls in the category of a young adult who has crossed his age of juvenility but is less than 21 years of age at the time when the offence is committed. It is widely recognised that younger the age of the offender, the lesser is its culpability. Therefore having regard to the totality of the circumstances before me at this stage, on prima facie consideration I am inclined to consider the Applicant's case. 24. It should also be noted that in a case where an offender is undergoing Page No.# 9/11 studies, his exclusion from education for a period of time is an added layer of punishment over and above what a non-student accused may be subjected to. This is because a student undergoing incarceration suffers loss of precious academic time which cannot be bartered for any wealth in the world. He also constantly witnesses his peers moving ahead in life than compared to him and when the frustration becomes insurmountable such frustration can create an emotion of rebellion, which, coupled with the exposure to criminality in prison, can easily gain traction and push him to become a hardened criminal. 25. This Court can only make an attempt and should make an attempt to positively impact the life of the Applicant before it. It is on the belief that the Applicant, having once gained the confidence of Court, would make a sincere attempt to reform and rehabilitate himself due to his academic credentials achieved in SSC and HSC exams and he studying the Management Degree Course despite heavy odds stacked against him. Considering the foregoing, I am of the opinion that the Applicant should be given a chance to make an attempt to demonstrate that he has reformed his conduct and is leading a law-abiding life with prospects of making a positive impact on society…” 22. Taking the entire factual matrix into consideration, this Court is of the prima facie opinion that the incident which led to the death of the deceased was the result of grave and sudden provocation by the deceased, kicking the doors and walls of the accused’s room, and subsequently picking up the machete (dao) while threatening to kill the accused. This Court has also considered the fact that the deceased had earlier abused and assaulted their mother, Page No.# 10/11 compelling her to leave the house to seek help from others. 23. It is apparent that due to no fault of the accused, he was assaulted by the deceased, and in a fit of extreme emotional turmoil, the accused retaliated, resulting in the death of the deceased. The materials suggest that the young mind of the 22 years old accused could not control his emotions under such compelling circumstances. This Court has further considered the fact that the accused has been in judicial custody for more than 4 (four) months and has missed his M.A. examination due to his continued detention. This Court has also considered the fact that none of the witnesses have been examined till date, though all are close family members of both the accused and the deceased. 24.In view of the above considerations and the fact that the accused cannot be equated with a hardened criminal, this Court is of the considered opinion that the accused person deserves to be granted the privilege of bail at this stage, so that he may focus on his rehabilitation rather than continue to remain incarcerated. 25.Accordingly, it is directed that the accused person shall be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.30,000/-(Rupees Thirty thousand) only, with one surety of like amount, to the satisfaction of the Sessions Judge, Yupia, subject to the following conditions: (i) that the accused shall appear before the Trial Court and fully cooperate with the trial as and when required; (ii) that the accused shall not influence, threaten, or attempt to tamper with any witness or evidence in any manner, whatsoever; Page No.# 11/11 (iii) that the accused shall provide and/or surrender his Aadhaar Card, PAN Card, Voter ID Card, or any other valid identity documents before the Trial Court; (iv) that the accused shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the Trial Court without prior permission of the Court; and (v) In case of any violation of the conditions imposed herein, the prosecution shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of this bail order. 26. Before proceeding to close this order, this Court deems it appropriate to clarify that the instant bail order is being passed in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, without entering into the merits of the trial. 27. In view of the above directions, the instant bail application is disposed of, as allowed. Return the TCR. JUDGE Comparing Assistant