Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 5782 (GAU)

ROFIQUE AHMED ALIAS RAFIQUE AHMED AND ANR v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

AB/919/2026 · 2026-05-14

Susmita Phukan Khaund

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010086622026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/919/2026 ROFIQUE AHMED ALIAS RAFIQUE AHMED AND ANR S/O LATE ABDUR RAHMAN VILL- HOUSE NO. 331, BORJARUNI, P.O. FULTOLI BAZAR, P.S. LANKA DIST. HOJAI, ASSAM, PIN NO. 782446. 2: GULJAR HUSSAIN S/O MOHAMMED JAYNUL HOQUE VILL- HOUSE NO. 243 BORJARUNI P.O. FULTOLI BAZAR P.S. LANKA DIST. HOJAI ASSAM PIN NO. 782446 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N J DUTTA, MS N.RAHMAN,MR. B HUSSAIN,MR. A A MONDAL Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER Date : 15.05.2026 Heard Mr. A.A. Mondal, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. S. H. Borah., learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioners, namely, Rofique Ahmed @ Rafique Ahmed and Guljar Hussain, seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Lanka P.S. Case No. 13/2026 under Section 61(2)/126(2)/324(4)/303(2)/3(5) of BNS, 2023. 3. The FIR dated 21.01.2026 was lodged by the informant purportedly an RTI activist with the allegation that on the same day around 8.25 pm when he was returning, the accused persons attacked him and caused damage to his vehicle and took away the dash camera and also cash of Rs.1,52,000/-. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that present petitioner is not named in the FIR. Drawing attention to the annexed order, he further submits that two co-accused, who were named in FIR were granted interim bail vide order dated 08.04.2026 in AB No.796/2026. 5. It is submitted by the learned Addl.Public Prosecutor that there are incriminating materials against the petitioners named above. They are on interim bail and they have appeared before the I.O. and their statements have been recorded. 6. I have considered the submission that the petitioners have not violated Page No.# 3/3 any bail condition. 7. In view of the foregoing discussions, the interim order dated 06.05.2026 is hereby made absolute under the same terms and conditions. 8. The anticipatory bail application stands disposed of. 9. Send back the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant