Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 15655 (GAU)

ABDUL AZIZ ALI @ AZID ALI AND ORS. v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

AB/2299/2026 · 2026-10-06

Rajesh Mazumdar

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010207522026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2299/2026 ABDUL AZIZ ALI @ AZID ALI AND ORS. SON OF LATEEMARAT ALI RESIDENT OFVILLAGE- AMBARI BHUYANPARA P.S. FAKIRGANJ DISTRICT-DHUBRI ASSAM. 2: APUSI KHATUN @ APUCHI KHATUN WIFE OF ABDUL AZIZ ALI RESIDENT OFVILLAGE- AMBARI BHUYANPARA P.S. FAKIRGANJ DISTRICT- DHUBRI ASSAM. 3: AZIMON NESSA @ AJIRON NESSA DAUGHTER OF ABDUL AZIZ ALI RESIDENT OFVILLAGE- AMBARI BHUYANPARA P.S. FAKIRGANJ DISTRICT- DHUBRI ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MS M MALIK Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM Linked Case :AB/2342/2026 Page No.# 2/3 AKTAR HUSSAIN ALIAS AFTAR HUSSAIN AND 3 ORS. SON OFABDUL AZIZ ALIAS AZID ALI, RESIDENTOF VILLAGE- AMBARI BHUYANPARA,P.S. FAKIRGANJ, DISTRICT- DHUBRI,ASSAM. 2: HOSEN ALI ALIAS HUSSAIN ALI SON OF ABDUL AZIZ ALIAS AZID ALI RESIDENT OFVILLAGE- AMBARI BHUYANPARA P.S. FAKIRGANJ DISTRICT- DHUBRI ASSAM. 3: AKIRUL ISLAM ALIAS AKHIRUL ISLAM SON OF SHAHID ALI ALIAS SHOHID ALI RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- MAJER ALGAPT-IV DISTRICT- DHUBRI ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. T SK, MS M MALIK,MR R KARIM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR ORDER Date : 07-10-2026 Heard Mr. T. SK, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. A.K. Das, learned Addl. PP. By the Order dated 18.09.2026, this Court had granted an interim protection allowing the petitioners to appear before the Investigating Officer to Page No.# 3/3 cause furtherance of the investigation. It has been submitted at the bar that the petitioners have accordingly appeared before the Investigating Officer and their statements have also been recorded. In view of the above, I do not find any reason for the petitioner's custodial interrogation. Accordingly, the interim protection granted to the petitioners by the Order dated 18.09.2026 is made absolute during the period of investigation. AB is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant