Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010031632026 2026:GAU-AS:3661 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/372/2026 FARIJ UDDIN AND 2 ORS. S/O LATE MAJIB ALI RESIDENT OF VILLAGE, PURBA HAITARKHA, HAITARKHA PART-II, P.S. PATHARKANDI, DIST. SRIBHUMI, ASSAM 2: CHAYARUN BIBI SON OF FARIJ UDDIN RESIDENT OF VILL- PURBA HAITARKHA HAITARKHA PART-II P.S. PATHARKANDI DIST. SRIBHUMI ASSAM 3: AYA BIBI W/O KERAMAT ALI RESIDENT OF VILL- PURBA HAITARKHA HAITARKHA PART-II P.S. PATHARKANDI DIST. SRIBHUMI ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M AHMED, MD I H LASKAR Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS O R D E R 12.03.2026 Heard Mr. M. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P.S. Lahkar, learned Addl. P.P. for the State respondent. 2. This is an application filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, (BNSS) 2023 praying for grant of pre-arrest bail to the accused applicant in connection with Patharkandi P.S. Case No.253/2025, registered under Sections 61(2)/103(2)/238 of BNS, 2023. 3. On 01.12.2025, one FIR was lodged with the allegation that on 25.11.2025 in the evening one Iqbal Hussain, the petitioner came to the house of the informant and took his son Sadikul Hoque on a motor cycle. Later he found in injured condition and taken to the hospital but he was found to be dead. Subsequently, video recorded by one Abdul Sahid was stated to be sent to them which showed six persons including the present petitioner assaulting the deceased. 4. Mr. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present petitioners are the accused nos.2, 3 and 6 in the FIR. The learned counsel submits that one co-accused was arrested on 03.12.2025 was granted regular bail by this court vide order dated 18.02.2026, passed in Bail Appln. No.373/2026. The learned counsel draws attention to paragraphs 5 and 6 of the said order, which may be reproduced herein below:- Page No.# 3/4 “5. After the last rejection, the case diary was sent back but it had to be procured again soon after, for this subsequent bail petition. Nevertheless, on perusal of the case diary, it appears that the forensic report is awaited to finalize the opinion regarding death. However, the post-mortem report is available which reveals multiple needle puncture marks in both cubital fossa area. In this context, the learned counsel of the petitioner submits that the deceased was unfortunately taking drugs. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner and the deceased were in the friends. 6. I find that during investigation, the statements of several witnesses have been examined and the statement of one witness, purportedly an eyewitness, has also been recorded before Magistrate. It appears that significant part of the investigation is already over and the FSL report is awaited to finalize the opinion regarding death in the post-mortem report. In the post-mortem report, though some of the organs like lung, brain, etc. have been mentioned as congested, but apart from aforementioned needle puncture marks, I have not noticed mention of any injuries.” 5. The case diary as called for has been received again in the context with regard to this bail application. 6. The learned Addl. P.P. submits that there are implicating materials against the present petitioners from the statements of witnesses regarding assault. The learned Addl. P.P. submits that more than one independent witnesses have implicated the petitioners with regard to commission of assault upon the victim and that one witness has also made videography of the same and in the context of such implication and electronic evidence, their custodial examination may be necessary. 7. The prosecution has drawn my attention of the court to the statement of one witness, Abdul Sahid, recorded under 183 BNSS before learned JMFC, Karimganj. He is stated to be the person who video recorded the alleged incident and from his statement, it is revealed that he saw the petitioner as well, Page No.# 4/4 along with other person beating up the victim. 8. In the circumstances, I find some force in the contention of the prosecution that, considering that death of the victim has taken place and investigation is not yet completed and there are direct implications against the present petitioners, including in statements recorded before Magistrate - at this stage, it may not be an appropriate case for grant of pre-arrest bail. 9. In such view of the matter, the bail petition stands rejected at this stage. 10. Return back the case. JUDGE Comparing Assistant