Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010050412025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/616/2025 SANIDUL MOLLAH AND ANR S/O SOBUR MOLLAH R/O AT VILL-KATLAMAIR PART-III, P.S. FAKIRGANJ, DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM PIN-783339. 2: SADDAM MOLLAH S/O SOBUR MOLLAH R/O AT VILL-KATLAMAIR PART-III P.S. FAKIRGANJ DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM PIN-783339 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M HOSSAIN, MS F INTAZ,MR. Z H AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 22.05.2025 1. Heard Mr. Z. H. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the S]tate of Assam. Page No.# 2/4 2. This application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioners, namely, Sanidul Mollah and Saddam Mollah who are apprehending their arrest in connection with Fakirganj P.S. Case No. 07/2025 under Sections 103(1)/3(5) of BNS corresponding to G.R. Case No. 84/2025. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 16.01.2025, one Fojila Khatun had lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-charge of Bandihana Police Outpost under Fakirganj Police Station, inter alia, alleging that her husband went for fishing in the river Brahmaputra on 08.01.2025, thereafter he did not return back and his empty boat was noticed by some other fishermen. Later on 13.01.2025, the dead body of the husband of the informant was recovered by BSF personnel from Sutlamari. It is alleged in the FIR that eight accused persons named in the FIR, including the present petitioners had some quarrel with the husband of the informant over the fishing in some specified area of river Brahmaputra and the accused persons have threatened the husband of the informant and, therefore, it is suspected that the husband of the informant was killed by the present petitioners along with other accused persons. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are innocent and the allegations made against them are not true. He further submits that there was no quarrel with the deceased husband of the informant and the present petitioners. He further submits that in the meanwhile, six of the other accused persons are already released on bail. However, the petitioners, who are innocent and are apprehending their arrest, merely because they have been named in the FIR. 5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed the grant of bail to the present petitioners and has produced the case diary of Fakirganj P.S. Case No. 07/2025. He has submitted that though the post-mortem Page No.# 3/4 examination report is not available, however, the inquest report of the deceased is available in the case diary which shows that injury marks were observed on the dead body at the time of conducting inquest. He further submits that there are witnesses who have stated in their statement recorded under Section 181 of BNS that they had seen an altercation between both the petitioners and the deceased, wherein the petitioners had threatened the deceased to kill him if he catch fish in the area prohibited by them. 6. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the sides. 7. It appears from the record that in this case the prosecution side was directed to produce the post-mortem examination report along with the case diary. However, in spite of the repeated chances given to the prosecution side, it has failed to produce the post-mortem examination report. 8. Though, the inquest report of the deceased shows that the dead body bore some injury marks, however, there is no direct eye-witness of the incident and apart from the fact that there are statements of witnesses under Section 181 of BNS wherein it has been stated that about 15 to 16 days prior to the giving statement, there was an altercation between the petitioners and the deceased over fishing rights during which the petitioners had threatened the deceased of killing him. There is no other evidence at this stage in the case diary. Though, there may be a strong suspicion against the petitioners at this stage of investigation, however, considering the fact, in the meanwhile, other six co-accused persons against whom equally strong suspicion was there have already been granted bail by the Trial Court. 9. This Court is of opinion that if the petitioners co-operate in the Page No.# 4/4 investigation, their custodial interrogation may not be necessary for fair completion of the investigation in Fakirganj P.S. Case No. 07/2025. 10. In view of above discussion, both the above named petitioners are hereby directed to appear before the Investigating Officer of Fakirganj P.S. Case No. 07/2025 within a period of seven days from the date of this order and co- operate in the investigation. If they do so within this stipulated period of time, in the event of their arrest, they shall be allowed to go on bail of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) each with one surety of like amount subject to the satisfaction of the arresting authority with following conditions:- (i) That the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 Investigating Officer; (ii) That the petitioners shall co-operate in the investigation; 11. This anticipatory bail application is accordingly disposed of. 12. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant