Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010013642025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./184/2025 ASHAN ALI @ ASANALI S/O LATE ABDULHAMED VIL- KARBALA P.S.GOALPARA, DIST.GOALPARA, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N UDDIN, MS. A AKHTAR,MR S K CHHETRY,MR. M ISLAM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 05.02.2025 1. Heard Mr. N. Uddin, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard P. S. Lahkar, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Page No.# 2/5 2. This application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Ashan Ali @ Asanali, who has been detained behind the bar since 18.07.2024 (for the last 203 days) in connection with Sessions Case No. 127/2024 under Sections 126(2)/310(3) of BNS read with Section 25(I-A)/27 of the Arms Act. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 15.07.2024, one Shri Nayan Goyal had lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-Charge of Agia Police Station, inter-alia, alleging that on that day, the informant was coming from Rajapara along with his father in a vehicle bearing Registration No. AS-01-FB-2205. 4. It is further stated in the FIR that when the said vehicle reached near Solmari Kali Mandir, at about 7.40 p.m., 4 to 5 numbers of unknown miscreants stopped the vehicle and after pointing pistol towards the driver of the vehicle, namely, Hasan Ali, killed the father of the first informant by shooting him on his head by pistol. 5. It is further stated in the FIR that the miscreants also assaulted the informant and caused serious injuries to him and looted an amount of Rs.90,000/-(Rupees Ninety Thousand only) cash from them. 6. It is further stated in the FIR that later on, the father of the first informant, namely, Ashok Goyal was rushed to the Goalpara Civil Hospital, where he was declared dead. 7. On the basis of the aforesaid FIR, investigation was initiated and after completion of the investigation charge-sheet was laid against 4 (four) accused persons and 2 (two) more accused persons were shown as absconder. Page No.# 3/5 8. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is in no way involved in the offence alleged in the FIR as well as in the charge-sheet and he has been falsely implicated in this case. 9. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been languishing behind the bars for the last 203 days and the trial is yet to commence, as charges are not yet framed. 10. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the charge-sheet in this case was filed even before completion of the investigation and from perusal of the charge-sheet, it was revealed that even before collecting the FSL report, the charge-sheet was laid and therefore, he submits that the petitioner is also entitled to get default bail. 11. He further submits that there are 22 listed prosecution witnesses in the charge-sheet and the trial is yet to commence, therefore, it is unlikely that the trial would culminate soon, hence, he submits that on the ground of prolonged incarceration, the present petitioner is also entitled to get bail. 12. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed to grant bail to the present petitioner on the ground that the offence involved in this case is heinous in nature, where one innocent person was killed, in cold blood, by using fire arms. He also submits that there are sufficient incriminating materials against the petitioner in the case diary and the trial is likely to end in conviction. He further submits that petitioner even tried to escape from the custody during investigation and he could be overpowered by the police by resorting to firing. 13. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor further submits that as Page No.# 4/5 two of the co-accused are yet to be arrested and as the petitioner also tried to flee away from custody during the investigation period, if he is granted bail now, there is every likelihood that he would jump bail and it would be very difficult to procure his attendance during trial. 14. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor also submits that in the meanwhile the Investigating Officer has already submitted the FSL report before the Trial Court. 15. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the sides and have gone through the materials available on record carefully. 16. On perusal of the materials available on record, it appears that there are sufficient incriminating materials against the present petitioner regarding his involvement in the alleged offence. 17. It also appears that though at the time of submitting of charge- sheet the Forensic Laboratory Report regarding the blood sample collected from the steering wheel and the driver seat of vehicle bearing Registration No. AS-01-FB-2205 was not submitted along with charge-sheet, however, the investigation as regards the involvement of the present petitioner in the alleged offence was complete. The only thing which was remaining was submission of Forensic Laboratory Report, hence, the facts and circumstances of this case does not justify releasing the petitioner on default bail. 18. Moreover, the nature of the offence involved in this case, where an innocent person was shot dead from point blank range does not justify taking a lenient view of the matter where there are incriminating materials Page No.# 5/5 against the petitioner. 19. The records of the case also suggests that the petitioner attempted to escape from custody during investigation, which itself may be regarded as an additional ground for denying him the bail at this stage. 20. This Court, therefore, is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. 21. The prayer for bail is, therefore, rejected and this bail application is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant