Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010154472026 2026:GAU-AS:13316 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1727/2026 MOIRAMA BEGUM AND ANR W/O NASIR UDDIN 2: NASIR UDDIN R/O VILL JUGIJAN BINNAKANDI P.O.- JUNGLE BLOCK P.S. JAMUNAMUKH DIST HOJAI ASSAM (INDIA) PIN 78242 VERSUS STATE OF ASSAM TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S AHMED, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 11.09.2026 Heard Mr. S. Ahmed, the learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. R. J. Baruah, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State. Page No.# 2/3 2. By this application, the petitioner have prayed for pre-arrest bail in connection with Jamunamukh P.S. Case No. 21/2026, registered under Sections103/118(2)/3(5) of BNS, 2023. 3. The FIR, in connection with which the petitioners are apprehending arrest, was lodged on 09.06.2026 by Aajir Uddin Lashkar, stating, inter alia, that on the same day, at around 07:30 a.m., the informant had gone to see his cultivable land and, while returning therefrom, the accused persons allegedly encircled and assaulted him. It is further stated in the FIR that accused No. 1 stabbed on the informant’s father, and, as a result of the said assault, the informant’s father met his death. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, insofar as petitioner No. 1 is concerned, she was not present at the place of occurrence, she being the wife of petitioner No. 2. He further submits that petitioner No. 2 was also not involved in the incident and that his name has been merely included in the list of accused persons. 5. Mr. R. J. Baruah, the learned APP for the State, on perusal of the Case Diary, submits that the witnesses have stated that it was petitioner No. 2 who had caught hold of the victim, while accused No. 1, who is arrayed as such in the FIR, had stabbed him. As such, he submits that petitioner No. 2 had taken part in the assault. As regards petitioner No. 1, the learned APP, on perusal of the Case Diary, submits that although she was present at the place of occurrence, no overt act on her part is discernible. Further, the learned APP prays that he may be granted some time to produce the post-mortem report of the deceased as well as the injury reports of the other victims. Page No.# 3/3 6. On consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsels, more so in view of the fact, that the victim died out of the blow given by accused no. 1, which is an admitted fact, this Court deems it fit to enlarge the petitioners on pre-arrest bail on furnishing of a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/-(Twenty Thousand) each with one local surety each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Authority under the following conditions: (i) The petitioners shall appear before the Arresting Authority within 10 days from the date of this order. (ii) The petitioners shall not hamper and tamper with the evidence of the case, and/or influence the witness connected with the alleged case; and (iii) The petitioners shall not leave their residence without prior permission of the Arresting Authority. 7. The AB application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant