Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010279552025 2026:GAU-AS:1810 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/3008/2025 AKKEL ALI AND 2 ORS. S/O LATE JOYANUDDIN SK 2: MAHMUDUL HOQUE ALIAS MAHMUDUL ISLAM S/O LATE JOYANUDDIN SK 3: SK ABU SAYED ALIAS SAYED ALI S/OLATE JOYANUDDIN SK ALL ARE RESIDENT OF VILL NOONMATI PART-I PS CHAPAR DIST DHUBRI ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A M KHAN, T T MONI,R. ALI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER Date : 10.02.2026 Heard Mr. A. M. Khan, learned counsel appearing for the accused-applicants. Also heard Mr. R. J. Baruah, learned Addl. P.P., representing the State. 2. This is an application filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 by the accused- applicants, namely, Akkel Ali, Mahmudul Hoque @ Mahmudul Islam and Sk Abu Sayed @ Sayed Ali, seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Chunari P.S Case No. 05/2025, registered under Sections 189(4)/190/191(2)/117(2)/ 109/118(2)/103(1) of the BNS, 2023. 3. The allegation as reflected in the FIR is that on 13/09/2025, one Golam Osmani, a resident of village Kistomoni Char had lodged a written ejahar at Chunari Police Station alleging that on 12/09/2025 at about 6:30 AM, some persons, namely, Monowar Hussain, Abdul Sattar, Bondesh Ali, Moinuddin, Nuruddin, Akab Ali, Sahar Ali, Juran Ali & Surhab Ali went to cultivate black lentils at village Roukhowa RBNC part IV in an area of 25 bighas of land and when they were cultivating, the FIR named accused persons equipped with deadly weapons like lathis, rods, daos, swords and other sharp weapons went to the place and attacked them causing grievous injuries to all the above named persons. Two persons, namely, Monowar Hussain and Abdus Sattar @ Sattar Ali were taken to Lakhipur Hospital in critical condition but they were declared as brought dead. 4. The learned counsel for the accused-applicants submits that though the accused- applicants have been named in the FIR, they are no way involved in the alleged incident. He submits that they have been falsely implicated in the instant case. He submits that their residence are about 10 kms away from the place of occurrence and they have been falsely implicated in the instant case without verifying the facts only because they went Page No.# 3/3 to the place of occurrence after hearing about the incident. In view of the aforesaid, he submits that the accused-applicants should be granted the privilege of pre-arrest bail and in the event they are allowed to go on pre-arrest bail, they will fully co-operate with the investigation of the case. 5. On the other hand, the learned Addl. P.P., strongly opposed to granting of bail to the accused-applicants, stating that there are sufficient incriminating materials against the accused-applicants. 6. By referring to the materials available in the Case Diary, the learned Addl. P.P., submits that many of the victims as well as other witnesses have named the accused- applicants for their involvement in the offence. 7. The Case Diary in the incident case has been produced before this court and the same has been perused. 8. On consideration of the materials available relating to the accused-applicants and after having found prima facie incriminating materials against the accused-applicants, this Court is of the considered view that the accused-applicants should not be granted pre-arrest bail at this stage. 9. In view of the aforesaid, the instant anticipatory bail application is rejected and disposed of. 10. Case Diary to be sent back immediately. . JUDGE Comparing Assistant