Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010063112025 2025:GAU-AS:6590 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/738/2025 JAKIR HUSSAN AND ORS S/O- SATTAR ALI, ASSAM 3: JAHANGIR ALOM S/O- SATTAR ALI 4: JAHANARA BEGUM W/O- SATTAR ALI ALL ARE R/O VILLAGE KACHUAR KHASH PART -I P.S AND DIST- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN-78332 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : G UDDIN, MR. N HUSSAIN,MR. B CHOWDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 23.05.2025 1. Heard Mr. B. Chowdhury, the learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam. 2. This application under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the petitioners, namely, (1) Jakir Hussain, (2) Nur Alom, (3) Jahangir Alom and (4) Jahanara Begum, who are apprehending their arrest in connection with Dhubri P.S. Case No. 83/2025, under Sections 61(2)(a)/103(1)/85 of the BNS, 2023. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that in the meanwhile, the petitioner No. 2, namely, Nur Alom has already been arrested and therefore, this anticipatory bail application in respect of the said petitioner has become infructuos. 4. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 19.02.2025, one Babur Ali had lodged an FIR before the Officer-In-Charge of Dhubri police station, inter alia, alleging that on that day, he was intimated by his wife over telephone that the daughter of the informant has died. It was reported that the daughter of the informant has committed suicide, but the accused persons named in the FIR had subjected the daughter of the first informant to mental and physical cruelty for demand of dowry. 5. It is also alleged in the FIR that on 02.02.2025, the accused Page No.# 3/5 No. 2 also committed rape on the daughter of the first informant and it is further stated in the FIR that the first informant suspect that the accused persons named in the FIR have killed his daughter. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that no specific accusation has been levelled against the present petitioners. He submits that the petitioner No. 1 is the husband of the deceased and the petitioner No. 3 is the brother-in-law of the deceased and the petitioner No. 4 is the mother-in-law of the deceased. 7. He also submits that specific allegations of rape are levelled in the FIR against the petitioner No. 2 only and he has already been arrested. 8. He further submits that the death of the daughter of the deceased is suicidal in nature and the petitioners are not responsible for the same. He also submits that the petitioners are ready to co-operate in the investigation. 9. On the other hand, Mr. B. Sarma, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed the grant of bail to the present petitioners on the ground that there are materials in the Case Diary, which he indicates that they have subjected the deceased to physical and mental torture before her death. 10. He, however, submits that though in the post-mortem examination report, the examining doctor had not mentioned his opinion, as it was kept pending due to non-receipt of FSL report, it shows that the deceased died due to hanging and there was a ligature mark on the neck Page No.# 4/5 of the deceased, which was obliquely placed and above the level of thyroid cartilage, which indicates that the hanging was suicidal in nature. 11. He also fairly submits that no injury marks were found on the death body of the deceased, however, the FSL report reveals that some bleedings were there in the private parts of the deceased. 12. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the sides and have gone through the Case Diary of Dhubri P.S. Case No. 83/2025. 13. Since no injury mark has been found on the deadbody and apart from the fact that there was a demand of dowry by the present petitioners, nothing else is there against the present petitioners in the Case Diary, this Court is of the considered opinion that if the above-named petitioners co-operates in the investigation, their custodial interrogation may not be necessary for fair completion of the investigation of Dhubri P.S. Case No. 83/2025. 14. In view of the above, all the above-named petitioners are hereby directed to appear before the Investigating Officer of Dhubri P.S. Case No. 83/2025, within a period of 10(ten) days from the date of this order and co-operate in the investigation. If they do so within the stipulated period of time, in the event of their arrest in connection with the aforesaid case, they shall be allowed to go on bail of Rs. 30,000/-each with a suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority with following conditions that:- (i) the petitioners shall co-operate in the investigation; and Page No.# 5/5 (ii) the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to the informant or to any other person who may be acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts before the Investigating Officer or to any Court. 15. With the above observations, this bail application is disposed of. 16. Send back the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant