Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010029242026 2026:GAU-AS:6285 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./468/2026 MRIGANKA PAUL SON OF SRI SAMBHU PAUL R/O BIPIN PHUKAN NAGAR, P.O.AND P.S. GOLAGHAT, DIST. GOLAGHAT, ASSAM, PIN-785621 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : G. R. SINGHA, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Linked Case : Bail Appln./254/2026 SRI RISHI BARUAH SON OF SRI RAJIB BARUAH BRRESIDENT OF VILLAGE - L.K. BORUAHBRROAD P.S.- GOLAGHAT DISTRICTGOLAGHAT PIN- 785621 ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR. K BORUAH Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM Page No.# 2/6 Linked Case : Bail Appln./384/2026 MONJIL DUTTA S/O MUNIN DUTTA R/O SEUJPAR WARD NO. 10 NEW AMOLAPATTY GOLAGHAT P.O. AND P.S. GOLAGHAT DIST. GOLAGHAT ASSAM PIN-785621 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR D J BORO Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM Linked Case : Bail Appln./333/2026 TONMOY PATOR and 2 ORS. SON OF SHRI SUJYA PATOR R/O ARRENGAPARA NORAGAON P.S. AND DIST. GOLAGHAT ASSAM 2: MD. SUHAN SHAH S/OLATE ISFAK SAHA R/O SANTIPUR WARD NO. 3 NEAR CENTRAL PUBLIC SCHOOL P.S. AND DIST. GOLAGHAT ASSAM 3: ANKUR BASUMATARY S/O SHRI JAWAHARLAL BASUMATARY R/O NORAGAON ARRENGAPARA P.S. AND DIST. GOLAGHAT ASSAM VERSUS Page No.# 3/6 THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR. M BISWAS Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM Linked Case : Bail Appln./341/2026 ANKUR SHARMA S/O SHRI PRASHANTA SHARMA R/O PHULBARI BOGIJAN P.S. BOGIJAN DIST. GOLAGHAT ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR. M BISWAS Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM Linked Case : Bail Appln./322/2026 ANKUR JYOTI SHARMA alias ANKUR JYOTI SARMA S/O PIKU SARMAR/O TAPAN NAGAR NEAR NAMGHAR P.S. GOLAGHAT DISTRICT GOLAGHAT STATE ASSAM PIN 785621 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MS. S G BARUAH Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM Page No.# 4/6 BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA O R D E R Date : 07.05.2026. Heard Mr. G.R. Singha, learned counsel for the petitioner in Bail Appln./468/2026, Mr. M. Alam, learned counsel for the petitioner in Bail Appln./254/2026, Ms. S.G. Baruah, learned counsel for the petitioner in Bail Appln./322/2026, Mr. M. Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioners in Bail Appln./333/2026 and Bail Appln./341/2026 and Mr. D.J. Boro, learned counsel for the petitioner in Bail Appln./384/2026. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, the 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 petitioners, namely, Mriganka Paul (petitioner in Bail Appln./468/2026), Rishi Baruah (petitioner in Bail Appln./254/2026), Ankur Jyoti Sharma @ Ankur Jyoti Sarma (petitioner in Bail Appln./322/2026), Tanmoy Pator, Suhan Shah and Ankur Basumatary (petitioners in Bail Appln./333/2026), Ankur Sharma (petitioner in Bail Appln./341/2026) and Monjil Dutta (petitioner in Bail Appln./384/2026), in connection with the Golaghat P.S. Case No. 256/2025, registered under Sections 189(2)/191(2)/109/103(1)/117(2)/ 118(2)/109/3(5) of the BNS, 2023. The case diary is received and perused the same. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that all the accused petitioners are in interim bail, which was granted in the month of February, Page No.# 5/6 2026 and till date, they have not violated any condition of the interim bail which was granted to them. Further, it is submitted that the interim bail was granted to the present accused/petitioners as all of them were going to appear in the Higher Secondary examination. However all the petitioners have appeared in the Higher Secondary examination and came out successfully and hence, they are in the process of taking admission for their graduation. Ms. S.G. Baruah as well as Mr. M. Biswas, the learned counsel have submitted in support of their respective plea that initially all the petitioners were arrested by the police and for a considerable period of time, they were in the judicial custody and thus, the I.O. also got sufficient opportunity to interrogate them, keeping them in custody. It is further submitted that there are sufficient progress in the investigation and all the accused petitioners are ready and willing to face the trial, if the case is ended with charge sheet and considering the young age of the accused petitioners and also their conduct, their bail prayer may be considered and the interim bail granted to the petitioners may be made absolute. Mr. Borthakur, the learned Addl. P.P., Assam submitted in this regard that there are sufficient incriminating materials against all the accused petitioners who initially assaulted one Mrinmoy Hazarika when he simply tried to rescue one Abhigyan Rajkhowa who was beaten up by the accused petitioners. He also read the statement of one of the co-accused wherefrom it is seen that one Ashik Rohman (another co-accused) had initially assaulted said Mrinmoy Hazarika and when he fell down on the ground, he was brutally assaulted with kicks and fists, for which he died subsequently. Mr. Borthakur, the learned Addl. P.P., Assam accordingly submitted that from the eye witnesses as well as from the Page No.# 6/6 statement made by other witnesses it is seen that all the accused petitioner are equally involved in the alleged offence. However, there is no mention about the specific role attributed by each of the accused petitioners. Mr. Borthakur accordingly submitted that it may not be a fit case to extend the privilege of bail to the accused petitioners at this stage and the same may be rejected. Hearing the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides and without going detail into the merit of the case, only considering the fact that the accused petitioners were initially in the judicial custody for a considerable period and the I.O. got sufficient opportunity to interrogate them as well as the fact that there are sufficient progress of the investigation, this Court is of the opinion that further custodial interrogation of the present accused petitioners may not be necessary for the purpose of investigation. In view of this, the order of interim bail granted to the present accused petitioners on 26.02.2026, 06.02.2026, 09.02.2026 and 10.02.2026 in their respective bail petitions, are hereby made absolute in the same terms and conditions. In terms of above, all these bail applications stand allowed and disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant