Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010144472026 2026:GAU-AS:11555 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2279/2026 ABDUL MINTU ALIAS MINTU ALI S/O- ABDUL RAHIM R/O- CHAWALKHUWA GHORBANDI CHUK P.S.-DIBRUGARH DIST- DIBRUGARH ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY P.P. ASSAM. ------------ Advocate for : MR S M ABDULLAH P Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER Date : 14.08.2026 Heard Mr. S. M. Abdullah P, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam and Mr. P. Adhikari, learned counsel for the informant. Page No.# 2/3 2. This is an application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 whereby the petitioner, namely, Abdul Mintu @ Mintu Ali has prayed for releasing him on bail after he was arrested on 07.08.2026 in connection with Dibrugarh Police Station Case No. 103/2026 registered under Sections 112(2)/109(2)/3(5) of BNS, 2023 read with Section 25 (1-A) of Arms Act. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 11.04.2026, one Ijaz Ahmed had lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-charge of Dibrugarh Police Station, inter alia, alleging that on 11.04.2026 at about 10:30 AM when the first informant’s younger brother, namely, Abid Ali was going to shop for purchasing some household items, suddenly Abdul Mintu Ali, Rinku Ali, Sono Ali and Alfaz Ali started firing at him with pistol/revolver. As a result of which, the younger brother of the first informant sustained injuries on his left eye. It is further alleged in the FIR that later on some other persons including the present petitioner assaulted the first informant and his father when they reached at that place. 4. Mr. S. M. Abdullah P, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is previous enmity between the petitioner family and the informant family since long and false cases are being lodged against the petitioner. And no such weapon was fired by the petitioner as alleged and no bullet injury has been caused to the alleged victim. Furthermore, the wife of the petitioner is a cancer patient and they have two minor children who need to be taken care of. Therefore, considering the above and the prayer for bail may be allowed. 5. Per contra, Mr. R. J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam has placed the case diary including the injury Page No.# 3/3 report, where from it transpires that the victim sustained bullet injury in his eye. And therefore, this is not a fit case for grant of bail to the petitioner, who is also otherwise, involved in several other cases of similar nature. 6. Having regard to the incriminating material available including the injury report, the prayer for bail stands rejected at this stage. 7. With the above observations, the bail application is dismissed and disposed of. 8. Send back the case dairy. JUDGE Comparing Assistant