Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 13436 (GAU)

MD AFNUR ALI v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

Bail Appln./2291/2026 · 2026-08-30

Sanjeev Kumar Sharma

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010167392026 2026:GAU-AS:12563 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2291/2026 MD AFNUR ALI S/O MD. TAJNUR ALI VILLAGE SAPKATA, P.S. MUKALMUA, DIST. NALBARI, ASSAM, PIN 781126. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M HUSSAIN, MR. A Z AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER 31.08.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This is an application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS for granting Page No.# 2/3 regular bail to the accused/petitioner, who has been taken custody since 11.06.2026 in pursuance to issuance of a custody warrant order by the learned Special Judge, Nalbari in connection with ND&PS Case No. 32/2022 in connection with ND&PS Case No. 32/2022 pending in the Court of the learned Special Judge, Nalbari arising out of Mukalma P.S. Case No. 157/2022 under Section 21(a)/22(c)/29 of the ND&PS Act. 3. The petitioner is an accused in ND&PS Case No. 32/2022 pending in the Court of the learned Special Judge, Nalbari. It is submitted that the petitioner had been regularly appearing at the trial, but on account of his detention in connection with another case namely, Mukalmuah P.S. Case No. 246/2025, he failed to appear on the dates fixed in the present case. Upon learning of the detention of the petitioner in the other case, the learned trial Court issued a production warrant, and upon production, the petitioner was committed to custody in the present case. Subsequently, the petitioner was granted bail in Mukalmua P.S. Case No. 246/2025. However, the petitioner continues to remain in custody in connection with the present case, as the learned trial Court rejected his bail application in view of the pendency of another case against him. 4. It appears from the above that the petitioner did not deliberately absent Page No.# 3/3 himself from the trial proceedings, but was prevented from appearing on account of his detention in the other case as mentioned above. 5. Having regard to the above, the prayer for bail is allowed. 6. The petitioner, Md. Afnur Ali, shall be released on bail of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. The petitioner shall not deliberately absent himself from appearing in the trial. 7. The bail petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant