Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010165212026 2026:GAU-AS:12140 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1805/2026 KAMIL ALOM LASKAR AND 6 ORS. S/O LATE JAMSHED ALI LASKAR.RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE- UTTAR JASNABAD PT. II, P.S. LALA, DISTRICT- HAILAKANDI, ASSAM 2: MOJMUL ALOM LASKAR S/O LATE JAMSHED ALI LASKAR. RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- UTTAR JASNABAD PT. II P.S. LALA DISTRICT- HAILAKANDI ASSAM 3: SAMSUL ALOM LASKAR SON OF LATE JAMSHED ALI LASKAR RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- UTTAR JASNABAD PT. II P.S. LALA DISTRICT- HAILAKANDI ASSAM 4: HUSSAIN AHMED LASKAR SON OF MUSABBIR ALI LASKAR RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- UTTAR JASNABAD PT. II P.S. LALA DISTRICT- HAILAKANDI ASSAM 5: DIDARUL HANIF LASKAR S/O AMIR UDDIN LASKAR RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- UTTAR JASNABAD PT. II P.S. LALA DISTRICT- HAILAKANDI ASSAM 6: SORIF AHMED LASKAR SON OF LATE ABDUL JALIL LASKAR Page No.# 2/4 RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- UTTAR JASNABAD PT. II P.S. LALA DISTRICT- HAILAKANDI ASSAM 7: SARIMUL HUSSAIN LASKAR S/O LATE ABDUL JALIL LASKAR RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- UTTAR JASNABAD PT. II P.S. LALA DISTRICT- HAILAKANDI ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N H BARBHUIYA, MS. N.A. LASKAR Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR F Z MAZUMDER(INFORMANT) BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 24.08.2026 Heard Mr N H Barbhuiya, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms S H Bora, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam and Mr F Z Mazumder, learned counsel appearing for the informant. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner No. 1 was arrested during the pendency of the present application and that a new application has been filed on his behalf. As such, this application is with regard to 6 (six) petitioners. 2. By this application, the petitioners, who are 6 (six) in numbers, have prayed for pre-arrest bail in connection with Lala PS Case No. 78/2026, under Sections 117(2)/118(2)/74/3(5) of the BNS, 2023. 3. The First Information Report in connection with which the petitioners are Page No.# 3/4 apprehending arrest, was lodged by Ms Rukia Begum Laskar, on 27.06.2026, stating, inter alia, that on 25.06.2026, at about 12:30 pm, the petitioners armed with lethal weapons, with a pre-planned intention abused her husband in filthy language and when her husband protested, the petitioners assaulted him and his wife, i.e., the informant. She further stated that the petitioners had attacked them with an intention to kill them and that when family members came to know about the attack, they came to the place of occurrence and seeing them, the petitioners had fled from the place The informant further stated that on finding their condition serious, they were taken to the Lala hospital for treatment and from there, they were taken to Silchar Medical College, for better treatment. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits petitioner No. 4 had lodged an ejahar against the informant’s side on the same date, i.e., on 25.06.2026, alleging that when an electronic transformer was to be re-installed in the land of the informant, there was a fight amongst two groups and that three of his brothers were seriously injured. He submits that the present FIR lodged against the petitioners was an afterthought on the part of the informant. 5. Ms S H Bora, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, however, submits on perusal of the Case Diary that the injured witnesses, i.e., the husband of the informant as well as one relative of the informant, namely, Nurun Nessa Laskar along with another had sustained injuries during the said fight. She submits that although the husband of the informant sustained minor injuries, but the same were on head, and Nurun Nessa Laskar was also injured on her head. She submits that the said injured witnesses have stated that those were the petitioners who had attacked the informant’s husband and others. 6. Mr Mazumdar, learned counsel for the informant submitted that the petitioners had, in fact, assaulted the husband of the informant and others and they suffered serious injuries. Page No.# 4/4 6. Upon consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsel, more so, in view of the fact that there is delay in lodging the ejahar by the informant and no reason being assigned for the same and also due to the fact that petitioner No. 4 had lodged the ejahar immediately on the day of occurrence, 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 the satisfaction of the arresting authority, under the following conditions:- i) the petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 7 (seven) days from the date of the order; ii) the petitioners shall not hamper and tamper with the evidence of the case, and/or influence the witnesses; and iii) the petitioners shall not leave their residence without prior permission of the Investigating Officer. 7. Bail Application stands disposed of. 8. Send back the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant