Gauhati High Court
AB/1451/2026 of MISSBAUL HOQUE AND ANR Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM on 26 August 2026
GAHC010133712026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1451/2026 MISSBAUL HOQUE AND ANR SON OF ABAD UDDIN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE -PEKURGOOL AND PO- PATHARKANDI, PSPATHARKANDI AND DIST- SRIBHUMI, ASSAM. 2: JAHAN UDDIN ALIAS JANU SON OF
GAHC010133712026
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/1451/2026
MISSBAUL HOQUE AND ANR
SON OF ABAD UDDIN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE -PEKURGOOL AND PO- PATHARKANDI, PSPATHARKANDI AND DIST- SRIBHUMI, ASSAM.
2: JAHAN UDDIN ALIAS JANU
SON OF AMAD UDDIN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- DAKHIN BANDARKUNA
PO- PATHARKANDI
PS-PATHARKANDI
DIST.- SRIBHUMI
ASSA
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H R CHOUDHURY, MS G TALUKDAR,Z HUSSAIN
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. M A CHOUDHURY(INFORMANT),MR A
AHMED(INFORMANT),MISS. P M AHMED(INFORMANT),MR. A AHMED(INFORMANT)
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR
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
Date : 27.08.2026 Heard Mr. H.R. Choudhury, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioners and Mr. M.P. Goswami, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State respondent.
Also heard Mr. M.A. Choudhury, learned counsel for the informant, who assisted the learned Add. P.P.
2. This is an application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023, seeking pre- arrest bail to the petitioners, who are apprehending arrest in connection with Patherkandi P.S. Case No. 69/2026, registered under Sections 61(2)/ 109(1)/ 118(1)/ 118(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that as per the FIR, the husband of the informant had assaulted the son of the informant and there was a pending case in this regard. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that there is a family dispute between them where the son and nephew of the informant had been involved in the brawl. He has submitted that an opportunity may be given to the accused/petitioners to appear before investigating Officer and have their statement recorded to enable the investigation to proceed in the case.
4. The learned Addl. Public Prosecutor has submitted that there is a wrong translation of the FIR and in fact, the accused had earlier attacked the husband and the son of the informant and there is a case pending between them in that regard.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the informant has submitted that the said case number is J.J. Case No. 2849/2021 and the petitioner No.1 is the accused therein
6. The learned APP has produced the medical certificate, which is made available by the learned counsel, appearing for the informant, I have perused the same.
7. In the facts and circumstances of the case, it is apparent that the petitioner No. 1 is again involved in brawl with the husband and son of the informant and has caused grievous injury during the pendency of another case, I am of the opinion that that petitioners may not be given the privilege of bail at this stage. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is rejected.
8. The bail application is dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant