Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010193422026 2026:GAU-AS:13901 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2181/2026 KURAN ALI AND 8 ORS. S/O- LT. KUMAR ALI 2: JAMAL ALI S/O- LT. MAJAM ALI 3: ALTAB ALI S/O- KURAN ALI 4: MAHIDUL ISLAM@ MAHIDUL HOQUE S/O- KURJAT ALI 5: RAFIKUL ISLAM S/O- TOTA MIYA 6: RAJEDA KHATUN W/O- RAHAM ALI 7: RAHAM ALI S/O- SAFAR ALI 8: CHAN MIYA S/O- SAFAR ALI 9: SALMA KHATUN D/O- KURAN ALI ALL ARE RESIDENT OF VILL- UTTAR KHARUAPARA MOUZA- NAGAON P.S- BARPETA DIST.- BARPETA ASSAM Page No.# 2/6 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM , REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED P.P, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S ISLAM, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER 18.09.2026 Heard Mr. S. Islam, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. B. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the respondent No. 1. 2. This application, under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023, is preferred by the applicants, namely, Kuran Ali, Jamal Ali, Altab Ali, Mahidul Islam @ Mahidul Hoque, Rafikul Islam, Rajeda Khatun, Raham Ali, Chan Miya and Salma Khatun; who have been apprehending their arrest in connection with Barpeta P.S. Case No. 112/2026, registered under Sections 309(4)/140(3)/326(g)/109/76/117(2)/324(4)/329(4)/127(2)/126(2)/191(3)/191( 2) of the BNS, 2023. 3. It is to be noted here that the aforementioned case has been registered on the basis of one FIR lodged by one Delijan Nessa on 11.02.2026. The essence of allegation in the FIR, dated 11.02.2026, is that on that day, when the informant, with her 2 sons, namely Azabul Islam and Sakibul Islam, were going Page No.# 3/6 to the school, the applicants restrained them on the road and forcefully confined her two sons in the house of one Tulu Mia, with a view to commit murder. Then, after getting information about the same, her husband informed Barpeta Police Station and thereafter, police arrived at there and rescued them at about 2:00 PM and handed them over to the informant. Thereafter, the applicants trespassed into the house of the informant and caused extensive damage to her property and brutally assaulted her, her husband and her mother-in-law and also looted an amount of Rs. 1,70,000/- in cash and gold jewellery. Thereafter, on arrival of local villagers, the accused petitioners ran away. Thereafter, the informant and other injured family members were hospitalized at BMCH and Sanjivani Hospital, and taking the advantage of the same, the applicants, again on the night of 12.02.2026, at about 02:30 AM, trespassed into the house of the applicant, vandalized it, looted valuable documents and also set her house on fire. 4. Mr. Islam, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants are innocent and they are no way involved with the offence alleged in the FIR and that they are ready to co-operate with the investigating agency, and that they will appear before the I.O. as and when directed and under such circumstances, he has contended to allow this application. 5. Per contra, Mr. B. Sharma, learned APP, by producing the case diary before this Court, submits that this application is preferred by 9 (nine) applicants and out of the said nine applicants, only the applicant Nos. 4 & 6 have been implicated by the independent witnesses, and the rest of the applicants have not implicated by them. However, he submits that the complainant has implicated all the 9 (nine) applicants. Page No.# 4/6 5.1 Referring to the injury report of the victim, Mr. Sharma submits that injured Pasu Mia has sustained 3 (three) injuries, out of which, one is lacerated and simple in nature, caused by a blunt object and the second is fracture, which is grievous in nature, caused by a blunt object and one ROI over the wrist, which is caused by a blunt object. And in respect of Sophia Khatun, Mr. Sharma submits that she has sustained 2 (two) injuries, and that both are lacerated and simple in nature, caused by a sharp object. He also submits that the investigation is almost complete, however, he has opposed to granting the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the applicant Nos. 4 & 6, at this stage. 6. Having heard the submissions of the learned counsel for both the parties, this Court has carefully gone through the application and the documents placed on record and also perused the case diary with the assistance of Mr. Sharma, learned APP. 7. It appears that the I.O. has achieved substantial progress in the investigation of this case. Further, it appears that though one of the victim suffered injuries which are grievous in nature, the same was caused by a blunt object. It further appears that one of the co-accused, namely, Aham Ali, who was arrested, has already been enlarged on bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Barpeta, in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 114/2026, vide order, dated 26.05.2026. 8. And under the given facts and circumstances, especially, considering the progress of the investigation as well as the nature and gravity of the offence, the custodial interrogation of the applicants seems to be unwarranted herein this case. And therefore, this Court is inclined to allow this application. Page No.# 5/6 9. It is provided that in the event of arrest of the applicants, namely, Kuran Ali, Jamal Ali, Altab Ali, Mahidul Islam @ Mahidul Hoque, Rafikul Islam, Rajeda Khatun, Raham Ali, Chan Miya and Salma Khatun, in connection with Barpeta P.S. Case No. 112/2026, registered under Sections 309(4)/140(3)/326(g) / 109/76/117(2)/324(4)/329(4)/127(2)/126(2)/191(3)/191(2) of the BNS, 2023; they shall be released on pre-arrest bail, on executing a bond of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety of like amount, to the satisfaction of the arresting authority. 10. The above privilege is however, subject to the following conditions – (i) that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required; (ii) that the applicants shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and (iii) That the applicant shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barpeta, without prior permission. 11. In terms of the above, this anticipatory bail application stands disposed of. 12. The case diary be returned. JUDGE Page No.# 6/6 Comparing Assistant