Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010024812026 2026:GAU-AS:2709 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./519/2026 SRI ARNOV DEKA BARUAH S/O LATE MONI BARUAH, A RESIDENT OF RUKMINIGAON, SADHANAI PATH, HOUSE NO. 07, P.S. DISPUR, GUWAHATI. VERSUS STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P C R MEDHI, MR A R MEDHI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER Date : 23.02.2026 Heard Mr. A. R. Medhi, learned counsel for the accused applicant. Also heard Mr. K. K. Parasar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. 2. This is an application filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, (BNSS) 2023 praying for grant of bail to the accused Page No.# 2/3 applicant in connection with Basistha P. S Case No.472/2025, registered under Sections 189(2)/115(2)/117(2)/109 of BNS, 2023. 3. As per the allegations made in the FIR dated 11.09.2025, a quarrel broke out between the victim and a co-student. In the course of the quarrel, the accused applicant, along with some other co-accused persons, assaulted the victim. As a result, the victim subsequently died 20 days later in the hospital. 4. It is seen from the charge sheet that initially the case was registered under Sections 109/115(2)/117(2)/189(2) of the BNS, 2023. However, as the victim succumbed to his injuries while undergoing treatment, subsequently, Section 103(2) BNS was added, and as per the postmortem report, the death was due to the injuries sustained on the head, which were ante-mortem and caused by blunt force impact. 5. The learned counsel for the accused applicant submits that the victim died 20 days after the incident, and it ultimately may not turn out to be a case under Section 103(2) BNS and that the petitioners and the co-accused did not have any intention of causing the death of the victim. He submits that all of them are young boys and were co-students of the victim and the alleged assault took place on account of certain altercation between the victim, accused applicant and some of the accused persons. 6. The learned counsel further submits that some of the co students have already been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 30.01.2026. He submits that since the co-students have already been granted bail, this Court also consider the prayer of the accused applicant who has already spent 3(three) months and 20 days behind the bars. He submits that the incident occurred at the spur of the moment without having any intention of Page No.# 3/3 the accused students including the present accused applicant to kill the victim, therefore, prays that the instant bail application should be allowed by releasing the applicant on bail. 7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and taking into account of the fact that the co-accused students who are similarly placed have already been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, this Court is of the opinion that the present accused applicant should also be released on bail. 8. Accordingly, it is directed that the present accused applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the Court of learned CJM, Kamrup (M), subject to the following conditions: (i) that the accused applicant shall regularly participate in the trial and shall not try to influence or intimidate any of the witnesses involved in the instant case. 9. In view of the aforesaid direction, this bail application stands disposed of, as allowed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant