Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 9946 (GAU)

NIJAM UDDIN LASKAR AND ANR. v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

AB/740/2025 · 2025-04-07

Susmita Phukan Khaund

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010065252025 2025:GAU-AS:4360 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/740/2025 NIJAM UDDIN LASKAR AND ANR. S/OLT. MOJAROF ALI LASKAR R/O VILL- PURBOGUL P.O. P.S. AND DIST.HAILAKANDI,ASSAM PIN-788151 2: SIRAJ UDDIN LASKAR S/OLT. MOJAROF ALI LASKAR R/O VILL- PURBOGUL P.O. P.S. AND DIST.HAILAKANDI ASSAM PIN-78815 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. S B CHOUDHURY, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER Date : 08-04-2025 Heard Ms. S.B. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner Nos. 1. Nijam Uddin Laskar and 2. Siraj Uddin Laskar, who have filed this application Page No.# 2/3 under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with prayer for pre-arrest bail as they are apprehending arrest in connection with Hailakandi Police Station Case No. 28/2025 under Section 87/3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. Heard Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has raised serious objection stating that there are incriminating materials in the Case Diary against the petitioner No. 1 and he is not entitled to pre-arrest bail. 3. I have considered the submissions at the bar with circumspection. I have also scrutinized the Case Diary. Investigation has progressed substantially. Statements of several witnesses including the statements of victim and informant have also been recorded. The petitioner is willing to cooperate with the remaining part of investigation. 4. It is further submitted that the petitioners are family members and only because the victim has grudge against the accused No. 1, she brought up false allegations against the present petitioners. The petitioners are not the prime accused. 5. The merits of this case are not brought to the fore. It appears that pre- arrest bail may be granted to the petitioner No. 1. 6. In the event of his arrest, petitioner No. 1. Nijam Uddin Laskar shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with a suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority under the conditions that :- Page No.# 3/3 the petitioner No. 1 shall appear before the Investigating Officer within one week and cooperate with the investigation. 7. Petitioner No. 2 was granted interim bail. His interim bail is hereby made absolute under the condition that he shall appear before the Investigating Officer within one week and cooperate with the investigation. 8. On breach of any of the bail conditions, both the pre-arrest bail granted to the petitioners shall automatically stand cancelled. 9. In terms of the above observation, this Anticipatory Bail Application stands disposed of. 10. Send back the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant