Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010047472026 2026:GAU-AS:6597 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./816/2026 BAPPI PAUL AND 2 ORS. S/O DINESH PAUL VILL- TENGARGOOLP.S. RAM KRISHNA NAGAR, DIST. SRIBHUMI, ASSAM 2: TAPASH PAUL S/O DINESH PAUL VILL- TENGARGOOLP.S. RAM KRISHNA NAGAR DIST. SRIBHUMI ASSAM 3: SAURAV PAUL S/O BAJAN PAUL R/O DALOO PART-II P.S. RAM KRISHNA NAGAR DIST. SRIBHUMI ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H R A CHOUDHURY, MR. I U CHOWDHURY,J M SULAIMAN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER Date : 12.05.2026 Heard Mr. H.R.A. Choudhury, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. I. U. Chowdhury, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This subsequent bail application has been filed under section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraskha Sanhita, 2023, whereby the accused petitioners namely, Bappi Paul, Tapash Paul and Saurav Paul, have prayed for bail in connection with Ram Krishna Nagar P.S. Case No. 56/2025 under Section 310(2)/311/115(2) of BNS, 2023. 3. The petitioners were arrested on 19.07.2025 and 20.07.2025 respectively in connection with this case. 4. The allegation in the FIR was about dacoity in the house of the informant, during which they also caused assault and harm. Investigation resulted in a charge sheet and it is submitted that the case is at the stage of appearance, poised for framing of charges. 5. In this subsequent bail application, it has been fairly submitted by the learned Senior counsel that the earlier bail petition, being BA No. 4029/2025, was rejected on 08.01.2026. It is further submitted that 24 witnesses have been listed in the charge-sheet for the purpose of trial and that the case has not yet been committed. On the ground of such delay and considering the length of detention already undergone, the learned Senior Counsel submits that this Court may Page No.# 3/4 consider granting bail to the accused at this stage. 6. Scanned TCR has been received. 7. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that there are sufficient incriminating materials against the petitioners and one of the victims also injured at the time of the incident and it is submitted that bail may be rejected at this stage and necessary direction for expediting the trial can also be given. 8. Para 7 of the earlier rejection order is reproduced herein below – I have gone through the detail narration in the charge sheet under the heading brief facts of the case. If these materials are accepted on face value, it would show the involvement of the accused persons along with others in committing the alleged offence of dacoity/robbery, during which the victims were also assaulted and tied up. Some of accused persons are also found to be involved in other criminal cases, the details of which have been given. From the charge sheet, it is also revealed that the alleged offences were also committed in connection with some other habitual offenders and some of whom are hiding in the area of Assam- Nagaland border. 9. Considering the nature of the alleged offences, there might be apprehension on the part of the witnesses for their testimony. 10. Trial is not yet to start. Upon giving my consideration to the matter, I am of the considered view that it would be prudent to refuse the bail at this stage so that at least the most crucial witnesses can be examined without apprehension on their part. Page No.# 4/4 11. In such view of the matter, I am unable to accept the subsequent bail petition as well and the same stands rejected. 12. However, it is hoped that the learned trial court, subject to docket constraints, shall endeavor to speed up the trial process, due to the continued under trial detention of the accused persons. 13. Bail petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant