Gauhati High Court
AB/2274/2026 of SARKESH ALI AND ANR Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM on 23 September 2026
GAHC010201022026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2742/2026 DHARAMBIR GAUTAM AND ANR S/O MANORAM GAUTAM, R/O RAGHWAPUR, P.S PARSURAMPUR, DISTRICT BASTI, UTTAR PRADESH. 2: SURAJ KUMAR S/O SUNAT GAUTAM R/O
GAHC010201022026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./2742/2026
DHARAMBIR GAUTAM AND ANR
S/O MANORAM GAUTAM, R/O RAGHWAPUR, P.S PARSURAMPUR, DISTRICT BASTI, UTTAR PRADESH.
2: SURAJ KUMAR
S/O SUNAT GAUTAM
R/O NIPANIYA
P.S PARSURAMPUR
DISTRICT BASTI
UTTAR PRADESH
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE P.P, ASSAM.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S M ABDULLAH P, MR. J ALI,MS F HUSSAIN
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
Linked Case : AB/2274/2026
SARKESH ALI AND ANR
S/O- MAJAR ALI
R/O- MATIAPARA-II
P.S. DIST.- KOKRAJHAR
ASSAM
PIN-783360.
2: FIRDUSH ALIAS FIDDUS ALI
S/O- MAJAR ALI
R/O-MATIAPARA-II
P.S. DIST.- KOKRAJHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 783360.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE P.P.
ASSAM.
------------
Advocate for : MR P K DAS
Advocate for : PP
ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA
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
28.09.2026
1. Heard Ms. F. Hussain, the learned counsel appearing for the accused applicants. Also heard Ms. A. Begum, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This is an application under Section 483 of BNSS 2023 praying for granting bail to the accused applicants in connection with Gossaigaon Police Station Case No. 155/2026 under Sections 61(2)/111/310(4) of BNS 2023, read with Section 25(1)(a)/35 of the Arms Act.
3. The allegations as made in the FIR dated 17.07.2026 is that on 16.07.2026, an information was received at Gossaigaon Police Station about some suspected armed persons being apprehended by villagers at Ballamguri under Gossaigaon Police Station.
4. When police reached the spot, they found three persons surrounded by locals in injured conditions, being assaulted by villagers on suspicion of being members of a gang of dacoit. During the search, a homemade firearm with one live round and one charging cable and a shoulder bag were recovered.
5. On arrest of the accused persons including the two accused applicants herein, they intimated that some other persons had fled from the spot. The apprehended persons belong to the State of Uttar Pradesh and alleged to have come to Assam to commit dacoity.
6. On receipt of the FIR, police registered Gossaigaon Police Station Case No. 155/2026 under the aforementioned sections.
7. The learned counsel appearing for the accused applicants submits that accused applicants have been arrested merely on the basis of suspicion of committing dacoity, however, no dacoity has been reported in and around that area. She submits that the accused applicants are already behind the bars for 73 days and further custodial detention in the instant matter may not be required. Therefore, she prays for enlarging the accused applicants on bail.
8. Ms. A. Begum, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, opposes the prayer of bail of the accused applicants. She submits that on perusal of the statements as well as other materials available in the case diary, the same clearly indicates and implicates the accused applicants' involvement in the offence as narrated in the FIR. Therefore, she opposes the prayer for bail.
9. This Court has heard the submissions made by the counsel appearing for the respective parties. This Court has also perused the case diary that has been received.
10. Taking into account the fact that the accused applicants have been apprehended by the villagers, who have been found in possession of a country-made gun with live ammunition, and the investigation in the instant case is in progress, this Court is not inclined to grant any bail to the accused applicants at this stage.
11. Accordingly, the instant bail application is rejected
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant