Gauhati High Court
Bail Appln./3081/2026 of SRI ABHIJIT DAS Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM on 11 October 2026
GAHC010216122026 2026:GAU-AS:15382 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3081/2026 SRI ABHIJIT DAS S/O SURESH DAS RESIDENT OF FATASIL AMBARI, SEGUNBARI, HOUSE NO. 30, P.S- FATASIL AMBARI, DIST- KAMRUP(M), ASSAM VERSUS THE
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010216122026
2026:GAU-AS:15382
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./3081/2026
SRI ABHIJIT DAS
S/O SURESH DAS RESIDENT OF FATASIL AMBARI, SEGUNBARI, HOUSE
NO. 30, P.S- FATASIL AMBARI, DIST- KAMRUP(M), ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE P.P., ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR A HAWARI, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE
HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
12.10.2026 Heard Mr A Hawari, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr D P Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.
2. By this application, the petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Bharalumukh PS Case No. 174/2026, under Sections 126(2)/117(2)/109(1)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
3. The FIR in connection with which the petitioner was arrested on 22.09.2026, was Page No.# 2/2 lodged by the informant, stating, inter alia, that while he along with his friend was coming back after celebrating Puja, the petitioner along with his associates blocked his road and assaulted him and his friend, due to which he sustained injuries.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during the Puja, there was an altercation between two groups, but the petitioner had not attacked as stated in the FIR.
5. Mr D P Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on perusal of the case record, submits that the Investigating Officer has implicated the petitioner for his attack upon the informant. He submits that the injury report is not available in the Case Diary.
6. Upon consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsels, more so, in view of the fact that specific allegation is not made against the petitioner, who was along with others, this Court deems it fit to release the petitioner on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/-, with one local surety each to the satisfaction of the learned CJM, Kamrup (Metro), under the following conditions:-
i) the petitioner shall appear before the concerned IO and Court, as and when called for; without fail;
ii) the petitioner shall not hamper and tamper with the evidence of the case, and/or influence the witnesses; and
iii) the petitioner shall not leave their residence without prior permission of the Investigating Officer.
7. Bail Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant