Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010179032026 2026:GAU-AS:12342 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2457/2026 MD FAIJAL HOQUE ALIAS JONAB SON OF JAFAR ALI, VILLAGE BORBISTUPUR, POLICE STATION GHOGRAPAR, DISTRICT NALBARI, PIN 781369 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A ROSHID, MS. M R DEVI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 27.08.2026 Heard Mr. A. Roshid, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. K. K. Das, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. By this application the petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Ghograpar P.S. Case No. 81/2026, registered under Section 108 of BNS, 2023. Page No.# 2/3 3. The FIR in connection with which, the petitioner was arrested, was lodged by the son of the deceased on 10.08.2026, stating inter alia that his mother used to maintain the entire family by working in different restaurants and that, 4 moths back the petitioner helped her in setting up a tea stall and in the process, the petitioner and the mother of the informant developed a relationship. However, the informants stated that with times the petitioner started threatening his mother and also have blackmailed her and that his mother was upset and consumed poisoned on 09.08.2026 and died in the hospital. 4. Mr. Roshid, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that this story narrated in the FIR is a concocted story and the petitioner, in fact, helped her to establish a shop and there was no question of any threatening or blackmailing the informant’s mother. He further submits that the petitioner was suffering from various ailments and the medical certificates are annexed in the petition. 5. Mr. K. K. Das, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State, however submits that although what kind of a threatening or blackmailing is not mentioned but the same would be revealed on perusal of the Case Diary. Mr. K. K. Das also submits that, the CDR of the phones carried by the petitioner and the victim was checked and repeated phone calls were found to have been made by the petitioner to the victim. 6. On consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsels, more so, in view of the fact that, the alleged threatening or blackmailing has not been stated with any specification and also due to the fact that, abetment has to be properly stated, this Court deems it fit to enlarge the petitioner on bail on furnishing of a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with one Page No.# 3/3 local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalbari under the following conditions: (i) He shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for. (ii) He shall not hamper and tamper with the evidence of the case, and/or influence the witness connected with the case. (iii) He will not leave the residence without the permission of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalbari. 7. The bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant