Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010287332025 2026:GAU-AS:897 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/3057/2025 SARIFUN NECHA AND 3 ORS. C/O RAIFADDIN AHMED, R/O LAUTOLA, P.O.- LAWTOLA, P.S.- MUKALMUA, NALBARI, ASSAM-781126 2: REKIBUDDIN AHMED S/O RAIFADDIN AHMED R/O LAUTOLA P.O.- LAWTOLA P.S.- MUKALMUA NALBARI ASSAM-781126 3: SONABAR ALI S/O LATE NAZAR ALI VILL- BADANI AKHIYA P.O.- LAWTOLA P.S.- MUKALMUA NALBARI ASSAM 4: MERAJUDDIN AHMED S/O HARMUJUDDIN AHMED VILL AND P.O.- KOTALKUCHI P.S. AND DIST- NALBARI ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M K DAS, O ASSUMI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN O R D E R 28.01.2026 Heard Mr. M.K. Das, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. R. Kaushik, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This is an application filed by the petitioners for grant of pre-arrest bail in connection with PRC No.599/2025 pending in the Court of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate (in short SDJM), Nalbari, registered under Sections 318/108/115/61/308(5) of BNS read with Section 6 of Assam Healing (Prevention of Evil) Practices Act, 2024. 3. Mr. M.K. Das, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the main accused in the F.I.R dated 26.06.2025 is a different person i.e. Raifuddin Ahmed and it is stated that said Raifuddin Ahmed along with his associates had committed the offence. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners before this Court is the wife of Raifuddin Ahmed, sons of Raifuddin Ahmed and a cousin of said Raifuddin Ahmed. He submits that by order dated 31.07.2025, the petitioners were enlarged on interim pre-arrest bail and were directed to appear before the Investigating Officer of Mukalmua Police Station Case No.162/2025 within a period of 07(seven) days and to co-operate with the investigation. Thereafter, on 21.08.2025 on the submission made by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that charge-sheet has been laid in the instant case, the bail application was withdrawn and the direction was given that the interim bail order may be extended for another 15(fifteen) days for Page No.# 3/4 giving them opportunity to avail appropriate remedy. 4. However, it is submitted that the petitioners did not avail the said remedy which the learned counsel for the petitioner submits was an inadvertent mistake. Learned counsel for the petitioner thereafter submits that it was found out that actually in the said case of Mukalmua Police Station Case No.162/2025, the charge-sheet was not submitted, which was reflected in the order dated 27.08.2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in the meantime, summons were issued to the petitioners by the Court of learned SDJM, Nalbari and they were directed to appear before the Court on 12.11.2025. On 12.11.2025, although the accused persons i.e. the petitioners did not appear before the Court, but steps were taken showing the cause of absence, which was heard, considered and allowed. Thereafter, the case was fixed on 3.01.2026 for appearance. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the case is registered under various sections of law and one of them is sessions triable. He further submits that the petitioners would appear before the learned Court on each and every date. However, due to inadvertent mistake, they could not appear within the period of 15(fifteen) days seeking bail from the learned Court of SDJM, Nalbari and as such he prays that the petitioners may be allowed to go on bail more so due to the fact that the bail application was withdrawn on an incorrect information that charge-sheet was submitted. 4. Mr. R. Kaushik, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State submits that the petitioners were given liberty to appear within 15(fifteen) days to avail the remedy, but then they did not appear before the court and that they also did not appear personally before the learned Court of Page No.# 4/4 SDJM, Nalbari on being summoned by the Court. 5. In have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records. 6. It is noticed that the main accused person has been enlarged on default bail. However, the petitioners, who are the relative of the main accused person, although had filed bail application before the High Court, but the same was withdrawn on the incorrect information stated above. 7. It is, as such, directed that the petitioners, namely (i) Sarifun Necha, (ii) Rekibuddin Ahmed, (iii) Sonabar Ali & (iv) Merajuddin Ahmed may be released on pre-arrest bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (rupees twenty thousand) each with one local surety each of like amount under the following conditions:- (i) The petitioners would appear before the Trial Court of SDJM, Nalbari on each and every date and also subsequently after the committal before the learned Sessions Court without fail; (ii) The petitioners would co-operate with the Trial; and (iii) The petitioners would not hamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses connected with the case. 8. The bail petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant