Gauhati High Court
Bail Appln./503/2026 of SAIFUL ISLAM Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR on 23 March 2026
GAHC010032702026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./503/2026 SAIFUL ISLAM SON OF SALIM UDDIN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE RAHAMPUR, P.O. CHAKABUSI, MANDIA, PIN-781308, P.S. BARPETA, DISTRICT-BARPETA, ASSAM, VERSUS THE
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010032702026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./503/2026
SAIFUL ISLAM
SON OF SALIM UDDIN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE RAHAMPUR, P.O.
CHAKABUSI, MANDIA, PIN-781308, P.S. BARPETA, DISTRICT-BARPETA, ASSAM,
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
2:KAHINOOR BEGUM (INFORMANT)
WIFE OF NURUL ISLAM RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-DEBRADI
P.O. BAGODI
PIN-781311 P.S. BARPETA
DISTRICT-BARPETA
ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR G JALAN, T TAKU,S FAZIL
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS. M K BROWN, (AMICUS CURIAE, R2)
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 : 24.03.2026 Heard Mr. G. Jalan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K Das, learned Addl. P.P for the State and Ms. M.K. Brown, learned Page No.# 2/2 Amicus Curiae in the matter.
2. Perused the scanned copy of the TCR. The victim has made incriminating statements against the accused-petitioner herein and from a cursory perusal of the evidence led till now, it appears that the accused and other connected to him have threatened and misbehaved with the family. This is only a prima facie observation on the contents of the TCR, and the same will not have effect on the trial proceedings. However, at this stage having noticed the above, this Court is not of the opinion that the petitioner can be granted the privilege of bail at this stage. Accordingly this bail petition rejected at this stage.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant