AB/1834/2026 of SANOWAR HOSSAIN Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM on 1 September 2026

ORDER

Date : 02.09.2026 Heard Mr. R. Amin, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam.

2. This is an application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 praying for the grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, namely, Sanowar Hossain, in connection with Fakirganj Police Station Case No. 39/2026 registered under Sections 61(2)/329(4)/117(2)/103(1) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner trespassed into the premises of the informant along with other co- accused and asked him as to why he had not attended the marriage ceremony of his nephew. An altercation thereafter took place between them, during which the petitioner assaulted the informant with hand blows, kicks, etc., and felled him to the ground. The petitioner, along with the other accused persons, also assaulted the son of the informant on his head with a piece of wood with an intention to kill him. As a result of the assault, the son of the informant sustained grievous injuries and became senseless. He was taken to Dhubri Medical College, from where he was referred to GMCH for better treatment. However, instead, he was taken to Coach Behar Hospital, where he succumbed to his injuries. Accordingly, Fakirganj P.S. Case No. 39/2026, under Sections 61(2)/329(4)/117(2)/103(1) of the BNS, 2023, has been registered against the accused-petitioner.

4. The I.O. has submitted the charge-sheet, wherein two accused persons, namely, Sonwar Hossain and Jahirul Islam, have been implicated.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, initially, the offence of voluntarily causing grievous hurt under Section 118(2) of the BNS was incorporated at the time of registration of the FIR; however, the said section has subsequently been omitted from the charge-sheet. It is further submitted that all the remaining sections, except Section 103(1) of the BNS, are bailable offences. Moreover, since no allegation of causing grievous hurt remains, the charge under Section 103(1) of the BNS, relating to the offence of murder, may not be attracted and, at best, the case may fall within the ambit of culpable homicide not amounting to murder. It is further submitted that, in view of the fact that the investigation has been completed, the petitioner may be granted the privilege of anticipatory bail.

6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed showing the petitioner as an absconder, whereas the materials on record, as revealed from the Case Diary (CD), indicate that the petitioner is the principal accused who directly assaulted the victim on his head with a piece of wood, and the resultant injury ultimately caused his death. The same is also supported by the Post-Mortem Report.

7. A perusal of the scanned copy of the TCR, including the charge-sheet, lends substance to the submissions of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. Although the charge of causing grievous hurt has been dropped from the charge-sheet, the Post-Mortem Report indicates that the victim died due to haemorrhage in the brain caused by the head injuries inflicted upon him. The materials on record, including the statements of the eyewitnesses, clearly implicate the petitioner in the commission of the alleged offence.

8. Having regard to the submissions made above, I am of the view that this is not a fit case for granting pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner is rejected at this stage, notwithstanding the fact that the investigation has already been completed.

9. Accordingly this Anticipatory Bail petition stands disposed of.

10. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant