Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010176712026 2026:GAU-AS:12981 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2414/2026 MEHBUB ALI ALIAS MEHBUB HUSSAIN S/O- ZAHANGIR ALI, PERMANENT RESIDENT OF VILL- LAKHIGANJ, P.S. BILASIPARA, DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM, PRESENT RESIDENT OF JYOTI PATH,, HATIGAON, P.S. HATIGAON, DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE P.P. ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR Z HUSSAIN, MR. M HOQUE Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 07.09.2026 Heard Mr Z Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr R J Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. 2. By this application the petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Raha PS Case No. 120/2026, under Sections 61/127(2)/117(2)/109/309(4) of the BNS, 2023. 3. The First Information Report in connection with which the petitioner was arrested, was lodged on 31.07.2026, by one Md Sultan Ahmed, stating inter alia, that accused No. 1 and accused No. 2, arrayed as such in the said FIR, called him with his relatives to Page No.# 2/2 their house on the pretext of selling a tractor and when they reached the house of the accused Nos. 1 and 2, the said accused persons confined them in the house, assaulted them and snatched away an amount of Rs. 5,50,000/-, along with other articles. 4. Mr Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although the petitioner was arrayed as accused No. 5 in the said FIR, he was not involved in the said incident. 5. Mr R J Baruah the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, submits on perusal of the Case Diary that the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 conspired with the other accused persons and called the informant and his relatives to their house and not only snatched away Rs. 5,50,000/- from them, but also had assaulted them. He, however, submits that the injuries inflicted upon the informant’s side is simple in nature, as could be seen from the injury report. 6. Upon consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsels for all the parties, and, more so, in view of the fact that no overt act was attributed to the petitioner, this Court finds it fit to enlarge the petitioner on bail on furnishing of a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/-, with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the CJM, Nagaon, under the following conditions:- i) the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer/concerned Court, as and when called for. ii) the petitioner shall not hamper and tamper with the evidence of the case, and/or influence the witnesses; and iii) the petitioner shall not leave his residence without prior permission of the Investigating Officer. 7. Bail Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant