Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010021602026 2026:GAU-AS:3559 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/260/2026 SHUKUR ALI S/O- CHADEK ALI. R/O- GAONBURA PAM. P.S.- HAJO, DIST.- KAMRUP, ASSAM, PIN- 781103. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP. ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR F HAQUE, MR. A R SIKDAR Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 11-03-2026 Heard Mr. A.R. Sikdar, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Das, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of State respondent. Page No.# 2/3 2. This is an application u/s 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 for granting pre-arrest bail to the accused petitioner in connection with Hajo P.S. Case No. 429/2025 u/s 61(2)/329(3)/189(2)/189(4)/103(2)/118(2)/109/ 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. 3. Case Diary is received. Perused the same. 4. It is submitted by Mr. Sikdar that the present petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any such offence as alleged in the FIR. Rather, at the time of incident he was in Guwahati for his business purpose. But, with some false and concocted allegation, his name is also included as an accused though he was neither present at the time of incident nor he committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. However, he is ready and willing to extend his cooperation in further investigation of the case, if he is provided with the privilege of pre-arrest bail. 5. Mr. Das, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted in this regard that there are sufficient incriminating materials against the present petitioner and from the statement made by the witnesses it is seen that they all came in a group with a common intention and with a criminal conspiracy and attacked the informant and his family members, out of which one person died on the spot as he was brutally assaulted by sharp weapon on his head. Mr. Das further submitted that his presence in the place of occurrence reveals from the statement made by the witnesses as well as the informant and also by the statement made by the co-accused persons. Accordingly, he submitted that considering the nature of offence, it is not at all a fit case to extend the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the present petitioner at this stage. Investigation is still going on and his custodial interrogation may be required for the purpose of Page No.# 3/3 investigation. 6. Hearing the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the materials available in the Case Diary and also considering the nature and gravity of offence, I find that it is not at all a fit case to extend the privilege of pre- arrest bail to the present petitioner at this stage and hence the same stands rejected. In view of above, this Anticipatory Bail application stands disposed of. Case Diary be returned. JUDGE Comparing Assistant