Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010150592026 2026:GAU-AS:10377 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1697/2026 FRANCIS ALIAS FRANCHIS DAIMARY ALIAS DAIMARI AND ANR S/O LT. BIROLA DAIMARY, R/O VILL- BWRIAGURI, P.O. P.S.- HARISINGA, DIST- UDALGURI, B.T.R., ASSAM, PIN-784510. 2: ALUISH NARZARI S/O RAJEN NARZARI R/O VILL- GORAIBARI BHAIRABKUNDA P.S.- UDALGURI DISTUDALGURI B.T.R. ASSAM PIN-784509 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P K DAS, MR. M BARUAH Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 28.07.2026 Heard Mr P K Das, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr Bankim Page No.# 2/3 Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. 2. By this application, the petitioners have prayed for pre-arrest bail in connection with Kokrajhar PS Case No. 90/2026, registered under Sections 109/117(2)/126(2)/ 304/351(1) and 61(2) of the BNS, 2023. 3. The FIR wherein the petitioners were alleged to be accused persons, was lodged by one Jangla Narzary on 13.06.2026, stating inter alia, that he was called by the petitioners to Kokrajhar for some work purpose and when he was on his way towards Kokrajhar and when he stopped for his dinner at 09:30 pm of 10th of June, 2026, 10 to 12 persons surrounded him after his getting down from his vehicle and he was brutally assaulted by the said persons and his belongings were looted away, which amounted to 5 lacs of rupees. It was further stated by the informant that he has strong reasons to believe that the incident was pre-planned and that the petitioners are involved in the same. He, as such, lodged the FIR to conduct the investigation to that aspect. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the story projected in the said FIR is incorrect and that the petitioners were promised some work by the informant for which the petitioners had given money to the informant and when the petitioners asked for the money back, the victim had alleged the said story and lodged the FIR. 5. On the other hand, Mr B Sarma, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State submits that the contention of the petitioners that they had gone to the Police Station and tried to lodge an ejahar against the informant cannot be believed in view of the fact that the said ejahar was not taken and neither it was registered and it was simply annexed with the instant bail petition. 6. Upon consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsel, more so, due to the fact that the informant had not alleged any overt act on the part of the petitioners and also due to the fact that the informant has only alleged that the petitioners are involved in the assault, this Court deems it fit that the petitioners be released on pre- arrest bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- each, with one local surety each to Page No.# 3/3 the satisfaction of the arresting authority, under the following conditions:- i) the petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 10 (ten) days from the date of the order; and ii) the petitioners shall not hamper and tamper with the evidence of the case, and/or influence the witnesses. 7. Bail Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant