Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010014512025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./178/2025 RAM KUMAR MANDAL AND ANR S/O THAKURDAS MANDAL R/O AMARA PATHAR, SONAPUR,GUWAHATI,P.O. AND P.S. SONAPUR, DIST. KAMRUP (METRO), ASSAM, PIN-782402 2: PARIMAL BISWAS S/O JAGADISH BISWAS R/O AMARA PATHAR SONAPUR GUWAHATI P.O. AND P.S. SONAPUR DIST. KAMRUP (METRO) ASSAM PIN-78240 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. T N DAS, MS JUTISMITA DAS,MS PURABI DEKA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 06.02.2025 1. Heard Ms. J. Das, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. J. Baruah, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. This application under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed by the petitioners, namely, (1) Ram Kumar Mandal and (2) Parimal Biswas, who are detained behind the bars since 21.12.2024 (for the last 47 days) in connection with Sonapur Police Station Case No. 217/2024 under Sections 191(2)/191(3)/121(2)/132/117(2)/118(2)/324(4)/325(5)/61(2) of the BNS, 2023. 3. The gist of the accusation in this case is that on 03.11.2024, one Hirak Jyoti Saikia had lodged an FIR before the Officer-In-Charge of Sonapur Police Station, inter-alia, alleging that on 02.11.2024 at around 7.28 pm, an information was received regarding illegal gambling taking place at Kolongpar Switch Gate Area. 4. On receipt of this information, a police team rushed to the said area and on reaching this said place, the gamblers fled away leaving their dice and other materials which were used in gambling. 5. It is further stated in the FIR when police personnel were collecting the materials, the accused persons named in the FIR along with some other persons, started attacking the police personnel and also damaged the vehicle. Page No.# 3/4 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioners are not involved in the offense alleged in the FIR. She submits that the petitioners were only present in the place where they went after hearing hue and crying. She also submits that the though, the name of the petitioner No.1 is mentioned in the FIR, even the name of the petitioner No.2 has not been stated in the FIR. She further submits that the petitioners are detained behind the bars for the last 47 days, and considering the period of the petition, they may be allowed to go on bail. 7. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that though there are materials in the case diary to suggest that the police team on duty were attacked by a group of people when police reached the place where there gambling was taking place. However, he fairly submits that as to whether the present petitioners assaulted the police personnel or not, there is insufficient evidence in the case diary at this stage. 8. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties as well as considering the fact that both the above named petitioners are detained behind the bars for the last 47 days, which is a sufficient period considering the nature of allegation levelled in this case, this Court is of considered opinion that, if both the above named petitioners cooperate in the trial, their custodial detention may not be necessary for fair completion in the investigation. 9. In view of above, the above-mentioned petitioners are allowed to go on bail of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand only) with one surety of like amount subject to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Morigaon with the following conditions: i. That the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any Page No.# 4/4 inducement, threat or promise to any person who may be acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts of the case before the Trial Court. ii. That the petitioners shall co-operate in the investigation. 10. With the above observation, this bail application is disposed of. 11. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant