Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010046242025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./619/2025 NAIF ALI @ MUSTABA ALI S/O- LATE MD MUSHTAQ ALI, R/O- H NO. 645, MASJID GALI, PS BHANGAGARH, DIST- KAMRUP (METRO), ASSAM MOBILE NO.7506268004 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A I ALI, MR. SURAJIT DAS,H KULI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. ABHIJIT MENA,MR. FIRUZ KHAN BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER 19.03.2025 1. Heard learned counsel Mr. S. Das for the petitioner Naif Ali @Mustaba Ali. 2. The petitioner has filed this application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 with prayer for bail as he is behind bars since 28.02.2025 in connection with Bhangagarh Police Station Case No. 33/2025 under Sections Page No.# 2/3 329(4)/115(2)/76 of the BNS. 3. Heard Mr. D. P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the respondent State and learned counsel Mr. A. Mena representing the informant. 4. Both the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the Informant have resisted the petitioner’s prayer for bail and have submitted that witnesses are being threatened by the petitioner’s agents preventing progress of investigation. 5. It is submitted that the petitioner is a Mutawalli and there has been a tenancy dispute with the informant. 6. The FIR clearly reveals that there is a dispute between both the parties. It is further submitted that the petitioner being behind bars cannot be a threat to the witnesses. It is further submitted on behalf of the petitioner that when enlarged on bail, he will abide by any stringent bail conditions if imposed upon him. 7. I have considered the submissions at the Bar with circumspection. 8. The FIR unfolds that on 09.02.2025, the petitioner entered into the informant’s house and forcefully tried to evict the informant and her family members who were residing as tenants in the Waqf Estate at Bhangagarh for the last 16 years. It is also alleged that the petitioner also outraged the modesty of the informant. 9. I have considered the submission that the petitioner has been behind bars for 19 days. It is further submitted that the petitioner is a middle aged man of 42 years and being a Mutawalli, he is not a flight risk. 10. I have scrutinized the Case Diary. Investigation is still under progress and so Page No.# 3/3 the merits of this case are not brought to the fore. 11. Considering all aspects, petition is allowed. The petitioner shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) with a suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned CJM, Kamrup (M), under the conditions that: (i) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every fortnight till completion of investigation, (ii) The petitioner shall not exercise threats to the witnesses or to the complainant, and (iii) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission. 12. On breach of any of the bail conditions, the learned Court is at liberty to immediately cancel the bail granted to the petitioner. 13. In terms of the above observation, this bail application stands disposed of. 14. Send back the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant