Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010066662025 2025:GAU-AS:3678 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./953/2025 MARJINA KHATUN @ MARAJINA KHATUN W/O- ABDUL JALIL, R/O- 1 NO BORGHULI, PS ULUANI, DIST- NAGAON, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S M ABDULLAH P, MD IMRAN,MD R ISLAM,MS F HUSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 28-03-2025 Heard Mr. S M Abdullah P, the learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. K. K. Das, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State respondent. Page No.# 2/3 2. This is an application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, with prayer for bail as the petitioner is behind bars since 03.03.2025 in connection with Uluani P.S. Case No. 13/2025 u/s 61(2)/127(7)/308(5)/115(2) of BNSS, 2023 R/W Section 25(1)(a)/27 of the Arms Act. 3. It is submitted by Mr. Abdullah that the present accused/petitioner is no way related with the alleged offence and nothing has been brought against her in the FIR. However, it is the only allegation brought against her that she abetted her husband and concealing him to avoid arrest. That apart, there is no other allegation against the present petitioner. She is behind the bar for last 03.03.2025 and the Investigating Officer has got sufficient time for her custodial interrogation. Mr. Abdullah further submitted that she has three minor children out of which one is 2 ½ year old child who is along with her inside the jail premises and the other two minor children are in her house and there is no one to look after the minor children. It is further submitted that in the notice issued against her u/s 47 & 48 BNSS also it does not reveal any ground of arrest which is mandatorily required to be followed and as per the ratio laid by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Prabir Purkayastha and Vihaan Kumar. He further submitted that she is ready and willing to co-operate with the Investigating officer in further investigation of the case. 4. Mr. Das, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted in this regard that in the FIR there may not be any allegation against the present petitioner, however, the present petitioner is also involved as a conspirator and the case is also registered u/s 25(1)(a) and 27 of the Arms Act. Hence, considering the gravity of the offence, the perusal of the Case Diary is necessary and he accordingly raised objection in allowing the present petition on bail. Page No.# 3/3 5. Hearing the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides and considering the length of detention already undergone by the accused/petitioner vis-à-vis considering the fact that there is a total non-compliance of Section 47 & 48 which are mandatorily required to be followed and in view of this and other aspects of the case, I find it is a fit case to enlarge the accused/petitioner on bail. 6. Accordingly, the accused/petitioner is released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) only with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned SDJM(M), Kaliabor, Nagaon. The accused/petitioner, namely Marjina Khatun @ Marajina Khatun, be enlarged on bail, subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the petitioner shall make herself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required; (ii) that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threaten or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and (iii) that the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned SDJM(M), Kaliabor, Nagaon without prior permission. The Bail Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant