Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010126112026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1725/2026 RAFIKUL ISLAM S/O LATE ABDUL JALIL, R/O VILLAGE KADIADINGA, P.O. P.S. JURIA, DISTRICT NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN-782124. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H R A CHOUDHURY, MS S S ZIA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 31.07.2026 Heard Ms. S. S. Zia, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Sharma, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. 2. By this application the petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Sessions (T1) Case No. 07(N)/2026, corresponding to Rupahihat P.S. Case No. 374/2025, registered under Section 103(1) of BNS, which is pending before the Learned Court of Additional District & Sessions Judge No. 1, Nagaon. 3. The FIR in connection with which the petitioner has prayed for bail was lodged by the father of the deceased, stating inter alia that his daughter was previously married and was mother of two daughters and that finding it difficult to stay with her husband, the informant’s daughter came and stayed with the informant along with her daughters and that, the daughter of the informant subsequently got married to the petitioner. The informant further stated that, on 07.11.2025, at around 7:30 AM, there was a heated argument between his daughter and the petitioner and that the petitioner stabbed his wife with a long knife in various parts of the body. The informant further stated that his daughter was rushed to the hospital but she died while undergoing treatment. It is also stated in the FIR, that the sister of the informant had seen the incident. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was arrested on 12.11.2025, and since then he is behind the bars. She further submits that the police on completion of investigation had filed the Charge Sheet and the trial against the petitioner is on. However, she submits that the Page No.# 3/4 prosecution witnesses were called by the Trial Court but none of them had appeared on 6 to 7 occasions and the trial had not proceeded. 5. On the other hand, Mr. B. Sharma, the learned APP for the State, submits that the Charge Sheet in connection with the instant case was submitted on 4th February 2026, and the charges were framed against the petitioner in the month of March, 2026 and that only 3 months have elapsed from the commencement of the trial. As such as, he submits that there was no delay in the trial and the petitioner had also not stayed for a very long period of time in the jail. 6. Mr. Sharma, the learned APP for the State, has also placed the Post Mortem report, which demonstrated that there are many injuries on the body of the deceased. 7. Upon consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsels and more so, in view of the fact that in the FIR, it is written that on the day of occurrence there was a big fight between the petitioner and the deceased and it is also seen that there are two main injuries on the body of the deceased and also coupled with the fact that none of the witnesses have been examined till date, the petitioner is enlarged on bail on furnishing of a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/-(Rupees Twenty Thousand) each with one local surety to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagaon on the following conditions: (i) The petitioner will appear before the Trial Court on each and every date without fail as and when call for. (ii) The petitioner will not influence the witnesses. (iii) The petitioner will not leave the place of residence without the Page No.# 4/4 permission of the learned Court. (iv) If the petitioner does not appear before the Trial Court even on 1 (one) day, the bail order should be cancel by the Trial Court. 8. The Bail Application is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant