Gauhati High Court
AB/1795/2026 of NAZIR UDDIN LASKAR Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM on 21 September 2026
GAHC010159862026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1795/2026 NAZIR UDDIN LASKAR S/O LATE KUTUB UDDIN LASKAR, R/O VILL. KASHIPUR, P.O. AND P.S. BORKHOLA, IN THE DIST. OF CACHAR, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM
GAHC010159862026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/1795/2026
NAZIR UDDIN LASKAR
S/O LATE KUTUB UDDIN LASKAR, R/O VILL. KASHIPUR, P.O. AND P.S.
BORKHOLA, IN THE DIST. OF CACHAR, ASSAM.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR UNUSH KHAN, SHAHIR KHAN,G MUSHAHARY
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR F A LASKAR(INFORMANT)
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
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
22.09.2026
1. Heard Mr. U. Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner Nazir Uddin Laskar, who has filed this application under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with prayer for pre-arrest bail as he is apprehending arrest in connection with Borkhola Police Station Case No. 9/2026 under Sections
296/75(2)/64(10/351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2. Heard Mr. R. R. Kaushik, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent State and learned counsel Mr. F. A. Laskar for the informant.
3. Learned counsel for the informant has raised objection against the bail prayer of the petitioner.
4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has also submitted that no new grounds have been projected by the petitioner while preferring this subsequent bail application on change of circumstances.
5. The allegation against the petitioner is that he had committed sexual assault on the victim. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that there is a land dispute prevailing between the petitioner and the victim. The informant’s husband is also involved in disputes with the petitioner.
6. I have scrutinized the case Diary. Investigation has progressed substantially.
7. The merits of the case are not brought to the fore. It appears that anticipatory bail may be granted to the petitioner.
8. I have considered the submission that the petitioner is an ex-serviceman and he is not a flight risk. The petitioner has also pledged to co-operate with the remaining part of the investigation. The petitioner is a middle aged man of 46 years. It appears that custodial interrogation may not be necessary.
9. In view of the foregoing discussions, the petitioner shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with a suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority under the conditions that:
(i) The petitioner shall appear before the
Investigating officer within 1(one) week and cooperate with the investigation,
(ii) The petitioner shall refrain from such activities with which he is alleged,
(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every fortnight till completion of investigation,
(iv) The petitioner shall not exercise threats to the witnesses or try to influence them, and
(v) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission.
10. On breach of any of the bail conditions, pre-arrest bail shall stand automatically cancelled.
11. Send back the Case Diary.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant