Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010178742026 2026:GAU-AS:12982 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2447/2026 MORAMI BEGUM W/O RAJA ALI AVIR KHAN, R/O BHUTNATH BAGAN, NEAR KALI MANDIR, P.S. BHARALUMUKH, DISTRICT-KAMRUP (M), ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : K U AHMED, E DEVI,MD. S ALI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 07.09.2026 Heard Mr K U Ahmed, 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 Bharalumukh PS Case No. 108/2026, registered under Sections 126(2)/103(1)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023. 3. The First Information Report in connection with which the petitioner was arrested, was lodged on 13.07.2026, by the brother of the deceased stating, inter alia, that while Page No.# 2/3 his brother was returning from his workplace towards his home and had reached near Bhootnath, the petitioner along with others had assaulted the deceased and left him in the road. It was further stated that one person took the phone of the injured person and called up the informant and that the informant reached the place of occurrence and took him to the hospital, but the doctor declared him as dead. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the wife of one of the accused persons, who had gone to bring back the accused person from the place of occurrence and he had placed the forwarding report, wherein, it was stated that three accused persons are the main culprits of the case and the name of the petitioner was not there in the said report. 5. Mr Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam, submits that the petitioner is the wife of one of the main accused person in the case and that although no specific case was attributed to the petitioner, but, she was in the group assaulting the victim. 6. Upon consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsels for all the parties, and, more so, in view of the fact that the petitioner was inside the jail for 56 days after her arrest and also 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, Kamrup (Metro), 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. Page No.# 3/3 7. Bail Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant