Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010030022025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./374/2025 TILENDRA BARUAH S/O- LATE JUNARAM BORUAH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - MAJ JALBHARI GAON, P.O- DHAKUAKHANA, P.S- DHAKUAKHANA, DIST- LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE P.P ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR B DEORI, R L CHUTIA,MR A KHANIKAR Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA ORDER Date : 14.02.2025 Heard Mr. A. Khanikar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. P. Goswami, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor appearing for the State respondent. This is an application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, wherein the petitioner, namely, Tilendra Baruah, has prayed for grant of bail in connection Page No.# 2/3 with Ghilamara P.S. Case No.06/2025 (G.R. Case No. 19/2025) under Section 108 of the BNS. The deceased Utpal Gogoi, being an employee of an NGO, was working for the scheme called Bakhundhara. On 08.02.2025, one unnamed person handed over Utpal Gogoi to police on an allegation that he had collected money in the name of Bakhundhara scheme. The said unnamed person also transferred some amount of money to some other unknown person through his mobile phone. That unnamed person took over the motorcycle of Utpal Gogoi. Thereafter, the father of Utpal Gogoi went to the police station and brought him home. That night, Utpal Gogoi sent a whatsapp message stating that the village Gaon Burah had done everything. Thereafter, Utpal Gogoi committed suicide by hanging in a tree. Mr. Khanikar submits that the petitioner belongs to Maz Jalbhari Gaon, whereas the present petitioner is the Gaon Burah of another village. Police arrested the present petitioner. That some people told police that for this petitioner, the deceased Utpal Gogoi collected money from different persons of the village and accordingly, Utpal Gogoi paid the petitioner a sum of Rs. 4,000/-. I have considered the submissions of both sides. On a plain reading of the FIR, it could be held that there is no case of abatement of suicide by the present petitioner. As such, this Court is of the opinion that under the given circumstances, the petitioner does not deserve to be detained in custody. Therefore, the bail prayer is allowed. Page No.# 3/3 Accordingly, the petitioner, named above, in connection with the above noted case, is allowed to go on bail of Rs.25,000/- with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned SDJM(M), Dhakuakhana. With the aforesaid observation, the bail application is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant