Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010104802026 2026:GAU-AS:8983 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1171/2026 SAIDUL ISLAM ALIAS SAIDUL HOQUE AND ANR S/O ABIYAL HOQUE, R/O VILL JANGILA, PO HOWRARPAR, PS DHUBRI, DIST DHUBRI, ASSAM, PIN 783324 2: SAIFUL HOQUE S/O ABIYAL HOQUE R/O VILL JANGILA PO HOWRARPAR PS DHUBRI DIST DHUBRI ASSAM PIN 78332 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : R AMIN, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER 22.06.2026 Heard Mr. R. Amin, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. R. R. Kaushik, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This is an application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 praying for the grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners, namely, (1) Saidul Islam @ Saidul Hoque and (2) Saiful Hoque in connection with Dhubri P.S. Case No. 665/2021 (corresponding to G.R. No. 2089/2021), (PRC No. 1229/2022) under Section 447/427/341/325/307/34 of IPC, 1860. 3. On 23.04.2021, the informant Babar Ali lodged an FIR before the I/C College Nagar T.O.P under Dhubri P.S. alleging that the FIR-named accused persons armed with lathi, rod etc formed an unlawful assembly and assaulted one Bhola Sk while he had been in his farm land, but the injured Bhola while trying to save his life, entered into the house of one unknown person. Then the accused gheraoed him and the accused Rabial Hoque assaulted him with one rod causing serious injuries to him. The other accused persons also assaulted him thereby causing serious injuries. Accordingly, this case was registered. 4. On going through the record it appears that the present petitioners were absconding during the period of investigation and the charge-sheet of the case was submitted on 30.11.2021. Thereafter, summons were issued to the petitioners but they never responded to the same. It is only in the present year i.e., 2026 that the petitioners first approached the learned Sessions Judge with an application for pre-arrest bail which was rejected upon perusal of the material available in the case diary. Page No.# 3/3 5. The TCR as called for has been received, and upon perusal of the material available therein, it appears that the involvement of the present petitioners is very much evident. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that some of the co- accused persons have been granted bail and at present there is no necessity of custodial interrogation of the petitioners. 7. From an examination of the circumstances of the case it appears that the petitioners have avoided the process of the law for long five years and there is no explanation as to why they did not approach the Court for relief earlier, and due to non-appearance of the petitioners, the trial has been inordinately delayed. 8. Considering the above, as well as the material available against the petitioners, the prayer for pre-arrest bail stands rejected. 9. The petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant