Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010184232026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2515/2026 AJOY BISWAKARMA S/O SRI GANESH BISWAKARMA,R/O DEORIGAON, PS SILAPATHAR, DIST DHEMAJI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR D MEDHI, MR P SONOWAL Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 01.10.2026 Heard Mr. D. Medhi, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B Sarma, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. 2. By this application, the petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Dispur Case No. 479/2026, registered under Section 121(2), 132, 262 of the Page No.# 2/3 BNS, 2023. 3. The FIR in connection with which the petitioner was arrested on 19-08- 2026, was lodged by the police personnel of the Dispur Police Station, stating inter alia that, when the petitioner was taken on his disclosure statement to a particular place, the petitioner instructed the police personnel to stop the vehicle and suggested them to take him to a rented room, which is few meters away from the spot, and when the petitioner got down on reaching the particular place, the petitioner tried to flee away from the clutches of the police personnel by assaulting one police constable on his face. It is further stated that, the police personnel had first fired shots into the air and when the petitioner is found to have ignored the same and when he kept on fleeing from the said place, the police personnel shot him on his legs and somehow, they could overpower the petitioner and apprehend him. It is stated thereafter, that the police personnel took the petitioner to the hospital without any delay and the petitioner was treated. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner had obtained bail in connection with the other case, with regard to which he was taken to the spot and that, the petitioner is inside the jail for the last 45 days in connection with the present case. 5. Mr. B. Sarma, the learned APP, on perusal of the Case Diary submits that, the witnesses who are the police personnel had stated in, no unclear terms that the petitioner tried to flee from their clutches and that, they somehow could apprehend him. He has also stated that, the police personnel who was attack by the petitioner had sustained injuries, although simple in nature. 6. Upon consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsels, Page No.# 3/3 more so in view of the fact that, the petitioner has been inside the jail for the last 45 days and also due to the fact that, the handcuff which was there in the hands of the petitioner was not connected on the other hands, this court enlarges the petitioner on bail on furnishing of a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court of CJM, Kamrup (M), under the following conditions: (i) The petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer once a week and should not fail in appearing before the Investigating Officer as and when call for apart from his appearance once a week as stated above. (ii) The petitioner shall not hamper and tamper with the evidence of the case, and/or influence the witness connected with the case; and (iii) The petitioner shall not leave their residence without prior permission of the Investigating Officer. 7. The Bail Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant