Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010025882026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./421/2026 MOSTAK HUSSAIN ALIAS MANDU S/O LAE MOKSED ALI ALIAS MOKSED HUSSAIN, VILL. MADHU SOULMARI PT II, KHASH KHAMAR, P.S. GAURIPUR, DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM. BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA O R D E R 18.03.2026 Heard Mr. A. T. Sarkar, the learned counsel appearing for the accused/applicant. Also heard Mr. P. S. Lahkar, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This is an application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of bail to the accused/applicant, namely, Mostak Hussain @ Mandu who was arrested on 26.07.2025 in connection with Gauripur P.S. Case No.234/2025 registered under Sections 61(2)/103(1) of BNS, 2023 corresponding to GR Case Page No.# 2/3 No.799/2025. 3. The gist of the case as has been narrated in the FIR is that one Lutfa Bibi, the wife of the deceased Moniruz Zaman Sk. lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-Charge, Gauripur Police Station alleging that on 21.05.2025, at around 8:00 PM, some accused persons named in the FIR had killed her husband in her house by using various weapons such as sword, dagger etc. On receipt of the FIR, the police registered a case on 22.05.2025 as Gauripur P.S. Case No.234/2025 under Sections 61(2)/103(1) of BNS, 2023. 4. During investigation, the Investigating Authority arrested the accused/applicant on 26.07.2025 and since then, for the last 234 days, he is behind the bars. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the accused/applicant submits that the name of the accused/applicant is not there in the FIR filed by the wife of the deceased. The learned counsel for the accused/applicant further submits that since the charge sheet has already been filed and trial is pending and the accused/applicant has already spent 234 days in jail, in the instant case, he should be allowed to go on bail. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that several accused persons have been shown as absconders in the charge sheet and Page No.# 3/3 they are yet to be arrested. The learned counsel for the accused/applicant submits that in view of the aforesaid reason, the trial would take considerable time, and as such, the accused/applicant be allowed to go on bail. 6. The learned APP on the other hand submits that there are sufficient materials against the accused/applicant in the incident alleged in the FIR. Mr. A. Mishra, the learned counsel appearing for the informant submits that another FIR dated 12.03.2026 filed by the wife of the deceased after being threatened by the accused persons in the instant case. The learned counsel for the informant therefore has opposed the bail application. 7. This Court has gone through the TCR that has been received in the instant case and having found prima-facie materials against the accused/applicant, is not convinced on any of the grounds made in the instant case to release the accused/applicant 8. In view of the aforesaid, the instant bail application is rejected and disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant