Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010081882026 2026:GAU-AS:6969 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1111/2026 HASHMAT ALI ALIAS HASMAT ALI S/O LATE MAJIBAR RAHMAN R/O KHOPNIKUCHI, P.S. HAJO DIST. KAMRUP (R), ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S M MOLLAH, MR. D N AMIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 20-05-2026 Heard Mr. S M Mollah, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D P Goswami, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State respondent. Page No.# 2/3 2. This is an application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, with prayer for bail as the petitioner is behind bars since 23.04.2026 in connection with Hajo P.S. Case No. 146/2026 u/s 329(3)/351(3)/191(2)/191(3)/115(2)/117(2)/74/75/324(4)/ 324(5)/326(g) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. 3. It is submitted by Mr. Mollah, the learned counsel for the petitioner that the present accused/petitioner is not involved in the alleged offence. However, it is a fact that there is a land dispute between the parties and some scuffle and altercation took place. That apart there is no such incident as alleged in the FIR. He further submitted that initially an FIR was lodged by the same informant wherein the sections registered are bailable. But, after about about 1 month later he lodged another FIR incorporating some non-bailable offence. However, the present petitioner is in custody since 23.04.2026 and thus the I/O got sufficient opportunity to interrogate him keeping him in custody. 4. Mr. Goswami, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted in this regard that from the materials available in the Case Diary, there is no allegation against the present petitioner in setting fire in the house of the informant and the Injury Report is also not available in the Case Diary. However, he submitted that some incrimination is there against the present petitioner also. 5. Considering the submissions made by learned counsels for both sides, perusing the Case Diary and the length of detention already undergone by the present petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that the I/O got sufficient opportunity to interrogate him keeping him in custody and hence further custodial interrogation may not be necessary for the purpose of investigation. Accordingly, I find it is a fit case to enlarge the accused/petitioner on bail. Page No.# 3/3 6. Accordingly, the accused/petitioner be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand) only with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned JMFC, Hajo. The accused/petitioner, namely Hashmat Ali @ Hasmat Ali, be enlarged on bail, subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required; (ii) that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threaten or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and (iii) that the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned JMFC, Hajo without prior permission. The Bail Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant