Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/3 vs The State Of Assam And Anr on 1 September, 2025
Author: M. Zothankhuma
Bench: Michael Zothankhuma
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010269332024
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/1228/2024
ALI HOSEN @ ALI HUSSAIN AND 2 ORS
S/O. LATE SOIMUDDIN
R/O. VILL. BOALKAMURI
P/S. BILASIPARA
DIST. DHUBRI
ASSAM.
2: ENNUS ALI
LATE BAHAL UDDIN
R/O. VILL.- BOALKAMURI
PART-I
P/S. BILASIPARA
DIST. DHUBRI
ASSAM.
3: ABU SIDDIQUE @ MD. ABU SIDDIQUE SK
LATE BAHAL UDDIN
R/O. VILL.- BOALKAMURI
PART-I
P/S. BILASIPARA
DIST. DHUBRI
ASSAM.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
REP. BY THE PP
ASSAM
2:SUKUR ALI
S/O. LATE AKKEL ALI
R/O. VILL. BOALKAMURI PART NO.-I
P/S. BILASIPARA
DIST. DHUBRI
ASSAM
Page No.# 2/3
PIN-783348.
------------
Advocate for : MR. D BORA
Advocate for : PP
ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI
ORDER
01.09.2025
(M. Zothankhuma, J)
Heard Mr. A. Chaudhury, learned counsel for the applicants. Also heard Ms.
A. Begum, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and A.T. Sarkar,
learned counsel for the informant.
This is an application under Section 430(3) of BNSS for suspension of the
sentence inflicted upon the appellants, vide sentence order dated 07.10.2024,
on the basis of the impugned judgment dated 05.10.2024 passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Bilasipara, Dhubri, in Sessions Case No.108/2001, by
which the applicants nos.1 to 3 are convicted under Section 302/325/323/149 of
IPC.
The learned counsel for the applicants submits that there had been a group
fight among two group of persons and the conviction of the appellants by the
learned Trial Court had been done, by not taking into account the fact that the
applicants were also being attacked by the other group. He submits that though
there were eyewitnesses, who named the applicants as the perpetrator of the
assault on the three deceased persons, the evidence shows that the death of
Page No.# 3/3
the deceased persons could not have been due to the actions of the applicants.
He accordingly submits that the sentence inflicted upon the applicants should be
suspended and the applicants should be released on bail.
On the other hand, the counsels for the respondents submit that the
applicants have all been implicated by the eyewitnesses, as having assaulted all
the three deceased persons. In this regard, they have relied upon the evidence
of PW-5, 8, 9, 11,12 & 15. They submit that the evidence of the eyewitnesses
shows that weapons had been used by the applicants, for causing injury on the
deceased persons. They submit that as three persons had died due to the
assault by the applicants group, the application should not be allowed.
We have considered the submissions made by the counsels for the parties
and on perusing the evidence of the eyewitnesses, we are of the view that the
sentence imposed upon the applicants should not be interfered with at this
stage. Consequently, the I.A(Crl.) is rejected.
JUDGE JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
