SURMAN ALIAS CHORMAN ALI AND 4 ORS. v. THE STATE OF ASSAM
AB/834/2026 · 2026-06-24
Parthivjyoti Saikia
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 9047 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 9047 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010079542026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/834/2026 SURMAN ALIAS CHORMAN ALI AND 4 ORS.
S/O AMEJUDDIN, PERMANENT R/O CHARAGAON, PS AMGURI, DIST CHIRANG, PIN 783393, ASSAM 2: FOJU ALI @ RAHIM MANDAL SON OF AMEJ UDDIN MANDAL PERMANENT RESIDENT OF PANIAGAON P.S. AMGURI AND DIST. CHIRANG PIN-783393 ASSAM 3: NADER ALI SON OF ABDUL ALI SHEIKH PERMANENT RESIDENT OF JAMDOHA NO. 1 P.O. GERUKABARI DIST. BONGAIGAON ASSAM PIN- 783390 ASSAM 4: SULTAN ALI @ SULTAN MAMUD S/O DILBAR HUSSAIN PERMANENT RESIDENT OF MADRASSAPARA P.O. ABAHYAPURI DIST. BONGAIGOAN ASSAM PIN-783384.
5: HASMOT @ HASMAT ALI SON CHYFUL ISLAM PERMANENT RESIDENT OF SIMLABARI PT.I P.S. AND DIST. BONGAIGAON ASSAM PIN-78338
Page No.# 2/2 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR SARFRAZ NAWAZ, A MISHRA,MD A RAHMAN,MR.
SURAJIT DAS,MR A W AMAN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM.
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA ORDER Date : 25.06.2026 Heard Mr. A Mishra, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr.Bhaskar Sarma, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam also heard Ms. T Parasar, the learned Amicus Curiae representing the respondent No.2.
2. This is an application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 223 in respect of Amguri P.S. Case No.15/2026.
3. Pursuant to the interim order dated 27.04.2026, the petitioners, namely, Surman @ Chorman Ali, 2. Foju Ali @ Rahim Mandal, 3. Nader Ali, 4. Sultan Ali @ Sultan Mamud and 5. Hasmot @ Hasmat Ali have appeared before the Investigating Officer and they have cooperated with police investigation.
4. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioners do not deserve to be detained in custody.
5. Accordingly the Anticipatory Bail Application of the petitioners is allowed.
6. Therefore, the interim bail granted by the Court to all the five petitioners on 27.04.2026 is hereby made absolute.
7. With the aforesaid direction, the Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of. The CD shall be returned.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant