Gauhati High Court
Bail Appln./273/2026 of SAIDUL ISLAM Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM on 22 February 2026
GAHC010017562026 2026:GAU-AS:2818 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./273/2026 SAIDUL ISLAM SON OF SUKUR ALI RESIDENT OF VILL- BORPETA, KOYAKISHI, P.S. AND DIST. BORPETA, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE
GAHC010017562026
2026:GAU-AS:2818
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./273/2026
SAIDUL ISLAM
SON OF SUKUR ALI
RESIDENT OF VILL- BORPETA, KOYAKISHI, P.S. AND DIST. BORPETA, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N J DUTTA, M RAHMAN,MR. M M ZAMAN,MR N AHMED
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, 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 : 23-02-2026 Heard Mr. N.J Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. This is an application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for granting regular bail to the accused/petitioner in connection with Hojai PS Case No.
333/2025 under section 318(4)/303(2)/3(5) of BNS, 2023. The CD called for has been received. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the provision of section 48 of BNS had not been complied with while effectuating the arrest of the petitioner. The petitioner had been arrested on 13.01.2026 and the CD received shows that in the arrest memo it has been stated that the notice under section 48 of the BNS as required in law had been sent through W.T Message to the Officer-in-Charge Barpeta Police Station. Perusal of the CD reveals that the W.T Message had been forwarded to the Officer-in-Charge Barpeta, Hojai, Assam on 13.01.2026. However, section 48 notice sent by W.T Message does not disclose as to whom the said notice was required to be served or that any efforts had been made to find out whether the notice under section 48 of BNSS had been actually served upon any family member or relatives of the petitioner prior to production before the learned Trial Court. In such circumstances, when the petitioner was not arrested from the place of occurrence and the Trial court record reflects in the order passed by the Remand Magistrate that he had to be represented through his legal aid counsel to defend himself, this Court is of the opinion that the arrest of the petitioner without complying with the provision of section 48 in the present case would require interference. This Court cannot lose sight of the fact that the allegation against the petitioner is grave and the petitioner may have been involved in other incidents as reflected in the CD. The petitioner has also proclaimed himself to be a resident of a locality beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the Investigating Authority and also the Trial Court, if put up for trial. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that adequate provisions has to be made for the petitioner to participate further in the investigation of the matter and also to ensure that he appears before the jurisdictional court as and when directed to do so. Therefore, it is directed that the petitioner namely Saidul Islam, S/o Sukur Ali, resident of Village-Barpeta, Koyakishi, PS & District-Barpeta, Assam, shall be released on bail in connection with Hojai P.S Case No. 333/2025 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 1,50,000/- with two sureties of the like amount, who shall be residents within the territorial jurisdiction of the jurisdictional court and at least one of whom shall have landed immoveable property in his name within the jurisdiction of the learned jurisdictional court. The grant of bail to the accused/petitioner shall also be subject to the following conditions;
(i) He shall surrender copies of his identification proof before the Court with Aadhar card/pan card etc.
(ii) He shall give appropriate proof of permanent residence before the learned jurisdictional court to its satisfaction, which may be verified as may be deemed fit.
(iii) He will not leave the jurisdiction of the I.O or the jurisdictional court without prior written permission.
iv) The petitioner shall not hamper or temper with the evidence of the instant case in any manner.
v) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer.
vi) The petitioner shall appear before the learned jurisdictional court and the I.O as and when required and directed to do so.
vii) The learned jurisdictional Court, shall be at liberty to impose such other condition or conditions as may be deemed necessary to ensure the participation of the petitioner in the trial.
viii) The petitioner shall not engage in any illegal activity of similar nature in the future.
ix) The prosecuting authority shall be at liberty to bring any violation of the conditions imposed upon the notice of the competent court and request for a recall/cancellation of bail.
x) The petitioner has been granted bail through this order only with regard to Hojai P.S No. 333/2025. The bail application stands disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant