Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010259832025 2025:GAU-AS:17063 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3783/2025 BABU ALI S/O LATE CHORAB ALI R/O VILL. MILON NAGAR, MADHYA NAKACHARI, NEAR DIGAMBARCHUK, P.S. DIST.- JORHAT VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M A MONDAL, MR. A ISLAM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 09.12.2025 1. Heard Mr. M.A. Mondal, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Baishya, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the State of Assam. 2. This application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Page No.# 2/4 Suraksha Sanhita(BNSS), 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Babu Ali, who has been detained behind the bars since 23.04.2025(for the last 231 days), in connection with Jorhat P.S. Case No. 202/2025, under Sections 126(2)/118(2)/109(1)/3(5) of BNS with added Sections 191(2)/191(3)/190/103(1) of BNS, 2023. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 21.04.2025, one Bhuban Ch. Baruah had lodged an FIR before the Officer- in-Charge of Rajabari Police Out-Post under Jorhat Police Station, inter alia, alleging that on the night of 20th April, 2025, the son of the informant was assaulted with sharp objects by one Riju and some other associates causing grievous injury on the person of the son of the informant. Later on, the injured persons succumbed to his injuries. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been languishing behind the bars for the last 231 days and though the charge sheet has been laid, however, not even a single witness has been examined till date by the prosecution side. He submits that the petitioner is ready to co- operate in the trial, however, considering the long incarceration, he may be allowed to go on bail. 5. On the other hand, Mr. K. Baishya, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed the grant of bail of the petitioner at this stage as the case in hand is of a serious nature, where the victim was brutally assaulted to death Page No.# 3/4 allegedly by the accused persons. 6. He further submits that the present petitioner has also been identified as one of the perpetrator of the offence by one of the prime (independent witness) during Test Identification Parade. Hence, he submits that unless the said witness is examined, it may not be proper to release the petitioner at this stage. As in such an eventuality, there may be likelihood of the present petitioner influencing the said witness. 7. Hence, he prays for rejecting the application for bail. 8. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and have gone through the scanned copy of the records of this case. 9. The case in hand involves accusation regarding assault of victim boy by the petitioner which led to his death and there are sufficient materials against the present petitioner on record. He was also identified by one of the independent witness in test identification period. 10. Hence, unless the said witness is examined, it may not be proper to release the present petitioner on bail at this stage when such grave accusation has been made against him. 11. The prayer for bail is therefore, rejected at this stage. 12. He may however move an application for bail before the trial court after examination of the witness, who had identified Page No.# 4/4 him during test identification parade. 13. With the above observation, this bail application is accordingly dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant