Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010021582026 2026:GAU-AS:2904 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./362/2026 OSMAN GANI @ OSMAN GONI S/O -LATE BOSIR UDDIN, VILL.- PATHIMARI, P.S. -KACHUMARA, DIST. -BARPETA, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY PP, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M S MONDAL, MR. S H RAHMAN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA O R D E R Date : 25.02.2026. Heard Mr. S.H. Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Addl. P.P., Assam appearing on behalf of the State respondent. This is an application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of bail to the accused petitioner, namely, Osman Gani @ Osman Goni, who is facing Page No.# 2/3 trial from jail, in connection with PRC Case No.4262/2025 (corresponding to Geetanagar P.S. Case No.85/2025), under Sections 351(3)/64(1) of the BNS. The scanned copy of the Trial Court record along with the case diary is received and perused the same. It is submitted by Mr. Rahman, learned counsel that the present accused petitioner is innocent and has not committed any such offence as alleged in the FIR. In a conspiracy with one Noor Farida, who has some political rivalry with the present accused petitioner and on her conspiracy only, the FIR was lodged by the alleged victim. No such incident had happened on the night of incident. That apart, the medical evidence also does not support the case of the prosecution. He further submitted that the accused petitioner is in custody since 19.11.2025 and considering his period of detention also, his prayer for bail may be considered. The accused petitioner will regularly appear before the learned Trial Court on each and every date to be fixed by the Court. Further, the petitioner is ready to abide by all terms and conditions, if he is released on bail. Mr. Sarma, the learned Addl. P.P., Assam submitted in this regard that there are sufficient incriminating material against the present accused petitioner and particularly, on the night of incident itself, she made hue and cry wherein all the nearby people gathered there and made search of the accused petitioner, who fled away from the place of occurrence. Mr. Sarma further submitted that the case is very recent and only on 09.02.2026, the case was committed and the date of appearance was fixed on 23.02.2026. Mr. Sarma accordingly submitted that till the recording the evidence of the victim, the prayer for bail may not be considered at this stage, as there may be every possibility of hampering and Page No.# 3/3 tampering with the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. Hearing the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides, I have also perused the case record and the statement of the victim under Section 183 of the BNSS and other materials in the case diary. It is seen that a serious nature of allegation is brought against the accused petitioner and hence, I find that till the recording statement of the victim, granting bail of the accused petitioner is not justified, as the victim’s statement is yet to be recorded and charge is also not framed yet. Considering this aspect of the matter and serious nature of the case, I do not find it to be justified to allow the petitioner to go on bail at this stage and accordingly, the bail petition stands rejected. However, the learned Trial Court is hereby directed to proceed with the case and record the statement of the witnesses, specially of the victim, preferably within 1/2 months. With the above observation, this bail petition stands rejected at this stage. JUDGE Comparing Assistant