Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010062022025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/417/2025 MAINUL HOQUE S/O MAJAR ALI NC BANDIA MANGALDAI DARRANG ASSAM INDIA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR. H RAHMAN Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM Linked Case : AB/418/2025 MAJAR ALI S/O AROJ ALI NC BANDIA MANGALDAI DARRANG ASSAM INDIA Page No.# 2/5 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR. H RAHMAN Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM Linked Case : AB/419/2025 MABJAL HOQUE S/O MAJAR ALI NC BANDIA MANGALDAI DARRANG ASSAM INDIA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR. H RAHMAN Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM Page No.# 3/5 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER 02.04.2025 Since all these anticipatory bail applications are arisen out of same F.I.R., the same are taken up together for disposal by this common order. 2. Heard Mr. H. Rahman, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. B. J. Das, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. K. K. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 3. This is an application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of pre- arrest bail to the accused/petitioners, who are apprehending arrest in connection with Mangoldoi P.S. Case No. 16/2025, under Sections 61(2)(6)/12(1)(2)/132 of BNS. 4. Case Diary has already been received. Perused the same. Heard both sides. 5. It is submitted by Mr. Rahman, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, that all the present 3 (three) accused/petitioners, namely, Mainul Hoque, Majar Ali & Mabjal Hoque, had already appeared before the I.O. and co-operated in the investigation of this case after obtaining the order of interim pre-arrest bail dated 06.03.2025. Further he submitted that the accused/petitioner in AB No. 417/2025, i.e. Mainul Hoque, is a physically handicapped person and to that effect, a certificate of disablement has already been issued in his favour by the authority concerned, wherein it is described that he has locomotor disability. At the relevant time of incident, he was inside his house, but as he is a resident near to the place of occurrence, his name was also incorporated in the F.I.R. Page No.# 4/5 6. In regards to the petitioner in AB No. 418/2025, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner- Majar Ali is a Government Gaon Burah and he arrived at the place of incident only to control the situation and as the incident took place in front of his house and he, being the Gaon Burah, tried to pacify the persons gathered at the place of occurrence. That apart, he is not involved in the alleged offence. The learned Senior Counsel further submitted that the petitioner- Mabjal Hoque, in connection with AB No. 419/2025, is a heart patient and he also undergone heart surgery on 21.02.2025 and he was on rest at the relevant time of incident. However, his name is also incorporated in the F.I.R. as he is also a nearby resident of the place of occurrence. 7. Accordingly, Mr. Rahman, learned Senior Counsel, submitted that all the 3 (three) accused/petitioners had already appeared before the I.O. extended their co-operation in the investigation of the case and they are still ready and willing to co-operate with the I.O. in further investigation of this case if they are granted with the privilege of pre-arrest bail. 8. Mr. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, submitted in this regard that though as per the Case Diary all the 3 (three) accused/petitioners has already appeared before the I.O. after obtaining the order of interim pre-arrest bail on 06.03.2025, but the statement of the accused/petitioner- Mainul Hoque is not available in the Case Diary. Further he submitted that all the present 3 (three) accused/petitioners are the F.I.R. named accused persons and they took part in the alleged offence. Mr. Das further submitted that the accused/petitioner- Majar Ali, who is stated to be the Government Gaon Burah, took the lead of the offence and he instigated all the villagers and thereby helped in escaping the other accused persons, namely, Jahar Ali and Saiful Islam, who were apprehended in connection with Dhula Page No.# 5/5 P.S. Case No. 175/2024, under Sections 61(2)/319(2)/308(4) of BNS and was available in the police vehicle, wherein around 2/3 thousands of people gathered at the place of occurrence and they helped in escaping said Jahar Ali and Saiful Islam on the instigation of the petitioner- Majar Ali. 9. Considering the entire submissions made by the learned counsels for both sides, materials available in the Case Diary and other aspects of the case, I find it appropriate to extend the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the present accused/petitioners in AB No. 417/2025 & AB No. 419/2025. Accordingly, the interim pre-arrest bail order, granted to the accused/petitioners, namely, Mainul Hoque & Mabjal Hoque, vide order dated 06.03.2025, is hereby made absolute in the same terms and conditions. 10. However, considering the materials available in the Case Diary, I do not find it appropriate to extend the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the accused/petitioner, namely, Majar Ali, in connection with AB No. 418/2025, as his custodial interrogation may be required for the interest of investigation. Accordingly, his prayer for pre-arrest bail is hereby rejected and the order of interim pre-arrest bail in respect of the accused/petitioner- Majar Ali, granted by this Court vide order dated 06.03.2025, is hereby stands vacated. 11. In terms of above, this anticipatory bails application stand disposed of. 12. The Case Diary be sent back. JUDGE Comparing Assistant