Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010194282026 2026:GAU-AS:14594 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2715/2026 SHANTO DAS SON OF LATE DEBENDRA DAS, RESIDENT OF VILLAGESOLIGRAM, POST OFFICE- E COVERNMENT OF KALAIN, POLICE STATIONKALAIN, DISTRICT- CACHAR, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M AHMED, MR A HAI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 30.09.2026 Heard Mr. M. Ahmed, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R. J. Baruah, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. 2. By this application the petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Sessions Case No. 104/2026, arising out of Ram Krishna Nagar Police Station Case No. 56/2025, registered Page No.# 2/3 under Sections 310(2)/311 of BNS, 2023, pending before the Additional Sessions Judge, Sribhumi. 3. The FIR in connection with which the petitioner was arrested on 23.07.2025, was lodged by the informant, stating inter alia that, on 17.07.2025, at around 02:00 AM, a group of five unknown people armed with weapons and covering their face entered into his house carrying sharp weapons and attacked him as well as his wife, as a result of which they sustained injuries. It was also alleged that the said persons entered into the house of his brother and assaulted his brother as well as the children. The informant thereafter, stated that the said miscreants took an amount of Rs. 1, 50, 000/- (Rupees One lakh fifty thousand) as well as gold ornaments. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during investigation of the said case the police arrested many persons including the petitioner and on completion of the investigation, submitted charge-sheet against the petitioner and many others. He submits that the petitioner was arrested only on suspicion without there being any specific materials against him. He further submits that other co-accused were already enlarged on bail by the co-ordinate Bench. 5. Mr. R. J. Baruah, the learned APP for the State, on perusal of the Trial Courts records submits that the petitioner had confessed his guilt and disclosed involvement of other persons, who were also arrested on the basis of the said statement. He further submits that jewellery ornaments as well as additional weapons were recovered as being led by the petitioner and other accused persons. 6. Upon consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsels, more so in view of the fact that, 10 persons were arrested including the petitioners, who were stated to have been involved in the offence only on suspicion and on some alleged recovery of the articles and also due to the fact that the informant has stated about only 5 unknown persons and also due to the fact that the petitioner shall been inside the jail for 1 year 2 months and 7 days, this court enlarges the petitioner on bail on furnishing of a bail bond of Rs. 20, 000/- Page No.# 3/3 (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Additional Session Judge, Sribhumi, under the following conditions: (i) The petitioner shall positively appear before the Trial Court as and when call for. (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 Applications stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant