Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010109832026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1177/2026 MUSLEK UDDIN CHOUDHURY AND 3 ORS. S/O LATE ISRAK ALI CHOUDHURY, R/O VILL RAJGHAT, JOYDHANPUR, PO LAILAPUR, PS DHOLAI, DIST CACHAR, ASSAM, PIN 788120 2: ISLAM UDDIN CHOUDHURY S/O LATE ISRAK ALI CHOUDHURY R/O VILL RAJGHAT JOYDHANPUR PO LAILAPUR PS DHOLAI DIST CACHAR ASSAM PIN 788120 3: ANSARUL HAQUE CHOUDHURY ALIAS ANSAR UDDIN CHOUDHURY S/O ISLAM UDDIN CHOUDHURY R/O VILL RAJGHAT JOYDHANPUR PO LAILAPUR PS DHOLAI DIST CACHAR ASSAM PIN 788120 4: ROBJON AHMED CHOUDHURY ALIAS RAPSON UDDIN CHOUDHURY S/O ISLAM UDDIN CHOUDHURY R/O VILL RAJGHAT JOYDHANPUR PO LAILAPUR PS DHOLAI DIST CACHAR ASSAM PIN 78812 Page No.# 2/4 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. I ALAM, MR. T SK Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, J NABI(INFORMANT),MR. T A CHOUDHURY(INFORMANT) BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 27.07.2026 Heard Mr. I. Alam, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Sharma, the learned APP for the State and Mr. T. A. Choudhury, the learned counsel for the informant. 2. By this applications the petitioners, i.e., 4 (four) in numbers have prayed for bail in connection with Dholai, P.S. Case No. 30/2026, registered under Section 191(2)/191(3)/118(2)/303(2)/324(4) of BNS, 2023. 3. The FIR connected with the instant case filed by the informant reveals that he was working was as professor of the Mizoram University and that he had come to his home town on the occasion of a family wedding and while he was returning for his work, he found a vehicle parked in front of the house of the accused person, because of which his vehicle could not move forward. He further stated, that unable to ply on the said road, he requested the accused persons to move their vehicle. By instead of the accused persons removing the vehicle, attacked him with sticks and other sharp weapons. He also states that Page No.# 3/4 during the scuffle, the accused persons stole his gold chain and snatched money from him and that he was physically assaulted and he was injured and that he was admitted in the hospital. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the story projected in the said FIR was incorrect and that, it was the petitioner, who had asked the Accused No. 1, who was minor to remove the vehicle and when the minor replied that it was not his or his family’s vehicle, the petitioner assaulted the minor as well as the mother of the said child. He further submitted that during the scuffle, the local villagers came and the assault took place. 5. The learned counsel further submitted that mother of the minor who is arrayed as Accused No. 4, in the said FIR, was assaulted and she sustained injury in her finger and other parts and to substantiate this contention, the learned counsel has placed the medical certificate issued to the mother. 6. On the other hand, Mr. B. Sharma, the learned APP for the State has placed the injury report of the informant that is the victim and the said report shows that the victim sustained grievous injuries on his head. 7. The learned counsel for the informant further submits that the victim was badly beaten up by the petitioners on his endeavour to get the vehicle removed from the road, so that he can go ahead to the place of his work. 8. On consideration of the submissions made by the parties, it is seen that there was a scuffle between the parties and in the FIR lodged by the petitioners, which was although not registered, it was stated that in the victim’s vehicle there were more than one person and that victim and others had Page No.# 4/4 attacked the petitioners. It is also seen that one of the accused was also injured and in the doctor’s report it is seen that the physical assault on the said accused person occurred on the same date at around 02:30 PM at the same place. 9. In view of the same, this Court, finds it fit to release the petitioners on pre-arrest bail on furnishing of a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/-(Rs. Twenty Thousand) each with one local surety each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority on the following conditions: (i) The petitioners to appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for, on each and every dates. (ii) The petitioners not to hamper or tamper the evidence of the case or to influence the witnesses. 10. The AB Application is accordingly, disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant