Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010065452025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./968/2025 DURGA CHAUHAN AND 2 ORS. W/O- MANOJ CHAUHAN (D/O LALANCHAUHAN) R/O SILIGURI BASTI, P.S. AND DIST. HOJAI, ASSAM PIN-782435 2: RAMBHA DEVI W/O LALAN CHAUHAN R/O KHERONI CHARIALI P.S. KHERONI DIST. KARBI ANGLONG PIN-782448 3: LALAN CHAUHAN S/OLATE MOHAN CHAUHAN R/O KHERONI CHARIALI P.S. KHERONI DIST. KARBI ANGLONG PIN-78244 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R P SARMAH, MS A DEKA,MR. D DOLEY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, U PRASAD(INFORMANT),MR S SHARMA (INFORMANT) Page No.# 2/6 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 01.05.2025 1. Heard Mr. R.P. Sarmah, the learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. D. Doley, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. P.S. Lahkar, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam as well as Mr. S. Sarma, learned counsel for the informant. 2. This application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita(BNSS), 2023 has been filed by the petitioners, namely, 1. Durga Chauhan, 2. Rambha Devi and 3. Lalan Chauhan, who have been detained behind the bars since 18.03.2025 (for last 45 days) in connection with Hojai P.S. Case No. 31/2025 under Section 61(2)/ 103(1)/351(3) of the BNS, 2023. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 02.02.2025, one Juti Devi, had lodged an FIR before the Officer-In-Charge of Hojai Police Station, inter alia, alleging that 5 numbers of accused persons named in the FIR intercepted the husband of informant when he was coming back to home by his scooter. The accused persons named in the FIR had attacked the husband of the informant with sharp weapon, causing injury on his head and other parts of body. The husband of the informant was immediately rushed to the Hojai Jorapukhuri District Hospital, wherein he Page No.# 3/6 was declared as dead. 4. The learned senior counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are not named in the FIR and they only happen to the family members of the main accused. He also submits that two of the petitioners are women and the petitioner No. 1 is the brother of the two years old child. He also submits that all the petitioners are also detained in the bars for last 45 days and the only accusation against them is that they harboured the main accused to escape from arrest by providing SIM card and other facilities. He further submits that there has been violation of Section 47 of the BNSS inasmuch as the same was not furnished to the petitioners forthwith at the time of arrest. He submits that though notice under Section 48 of the BNSS has been served on one of the relatives of the petitioners, however, there has been violation of Section 48(2) and 48(3) of the BNSS. 5. The learned senior counsel for the petitioners further submits that the petitioners are ready to cooperate in the investigation and they are not involved in the offence alleged in the FIR. He also submits that the mobile phone as well as the SIM card of Kanchan Chouhan was allowed to used by his driver Bhola Chauhan. 6. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Page No.# 4/6 Assam, Mr. P.S. Lahkar as well as Mr. S. Sarma, learned counsel for the informant, have vehemently opposed to grant bail to present petitioners. Mr. Lahkar has produced the Case Diary of Hojai P.S. Case No. 31/2025 and has submitted that there are incriminating materials against the petitioners. He however, submits that the notice under Sections 47/48 of the BNSS are duly served on the petitioners and their relatives and there is no violation of the procedural requirement in furnishing the ground of arrest to the petitioners and their relatives. He also submits that there are materials in the case diary, which shows that the petitioners have conspired with the main accused person in commission of alleged offence and they have helped him to escape from arrest. He also submits that at this stage, if bail is granted to the petitioners, it would adversely affect the course of investigation. 7. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties and I have gone through the materials available on record including the case diary of Hojai P.S. Case No. 31/2025. 8. On perusal of the case diary, it appears that the main accusation against all the petitioners is that they deliberately have conspired to shield the main accused Kanchan Chauhan from the authorities, after the alleged offence and they provided logistic support to help the accused to evade arrest and also wilfully provided shelter and facilitated him to escape. 9. It appears that the instant case i.e. Hojai P.S. Case No. 31/2025, Page No.# 5/6 has been registered under Sections 61(2)/ 103(1)/351(3) BNS, however, no penal provision of harbouring the offender under Section 253 of the BNS has been included therein.The main accusation against the present petitioners is only in relation to the offence under Section 249 of the BNS. There is no accusation against them that the present petitioners conspired with the main accused for commission of alleged offence of murder of the victim Jitendra Chauhan. 10. Out of above-named petitioners, two are ladies and the third one who is a male person, who is aged about 60 years. They are detained in custody for last 45 days. Apart from the accusation regarding harbouring, no material is there on record regarding their complicity in the commission of alleged offence of murdering of victim Jitendra Chauhan. Morevoer, considering the fact that the petitioners are behind the bar for last 45 days, this Court is of the view that if they cooperate with the investigating officer, their further custodial detention may not be necessary. 11. In view of above discussions, the petitioners namely, 1. Durga Chauhan, 2. Rambha Devi and 3. Lalan Chauhan are hereby allowed to go on bail of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) each with a suitable surety of like amount each, subject to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hojai with the following conditions:- (i) the petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Police Officer within 7(seven) days from the date of this order and shall co-operate with the investigation; and Page No.# 6/6 (ii) the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to the informant or to any other persons 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. 12. With the above observations, this bail application is hereby disposed of. 13. Return the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant