[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/5 vs The State Of Assam on 5 February, 2026
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010259002025
2026:GAU-AS:1515
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./3821/2025
JAHANGIR HUSSAIN AND ANR
S/O YAKUB ALI ALIAS ABDUL HUSSAIN, R/O VILL KHAGENHAT, PS
FALAKATA, DIST ALIPURDUAR, WEST BENGAL
2: MANNAN ALI
S/O BAHALUDDIN MIA
R/O VILL DHULAGAON
PS FALAKATA
DIST ALIPURDUAR
WEST BENGA
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A R SIKDAR, MR. Z H BORA,J A SIKDAR,MR. S I
TALUKDAR
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
BEFORE
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA
ORDER
Date : 05.02.2026.
Page No.# 2/5
Heard Mr. A.R. Sikdar, learned counsel for the accused/petitioners. Also heard
Mr. P.S. Lahkar, learned Addl. P.P., Assam appearing for the respondent State.
This is an application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, praying for grant of bail
to the accused/petitioners, namely, Jahangir Hussain and Mannan Ali, who have
been arrested in connection with Bilasipara P.S. Case No. 96/2022, under
Sections 365/302/201 of the Indian Penal Code, corresponding to Sessions Case
No. 53/2023, which is pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge,
Bilasipara.
The scanned copy of the case record along with the Case Diary has already
been received. Perused the same. Heard both sides.
It is submitted by Mr. Sikdar, the learned counsel for the accused/petitioners
that the present two petitioners are in custody for more than three years, one is
since 26.02.2023 and the other since 03.03.2023. Their earlier bail prayer was
rejected after perusal of the case record considering the fact that some vital
witnesses are yet to be examined by the prosecution. But after passing of the
earlier order, the learned Trial Court below had examined two more vital
witnesses, namely, PW.4 and PW.5. Thus out of 9 cited witnesses, the
prosecution has already examined 5 witnesses and only the official witnesses
are left to be examined.
Thus, there cannot be any chance of hampering or tempering with the
witnesses as all the independent witnesses have already been examined. The
learned counsel for the accused petitioners further submitted that there are no
incriminating materials in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses so far
examined and thus the chance of conviction is also very bleak in the present
case. He further submitted that the petitioners are permanent residents of the
Page No.# 3/5
addressed locality and hence, there is no chance of absconding, if they are
released on bail. Rather, they will provide sufficient sureties for their presence.
Mr. P.S. Lahkar, learned Addl. P.P., Assam submitted in this regard that five
numbers of witnesses are already examined by the prosecution and the PW.1
and PW.2 have sufficiently implicated the present accused petitioners and they
also described as to how the deceased was brutally killed and even after
committing the murder, the body of the deceased was also burnt by setting fire.
He further submitted that after committing the said crime, both the accused
petitioners fled away and after lots of endeavour the petitioners could be
arrested from West Bengal and hence, the probability of absconding of these
two petitioners cannot be denied at this stage, if they are granted bail and
procurement of their attendance will also not be possible for trial of the case.
Mr. Lahkar further submitted that considering the nature of the allegation and
also considering the fact that a person was brutally killed by the petitioners, the
bail petition for the present two accused/petitioners may not be considered at
this stage.
Hearing the submissions of learned counsel for both sides, I have also perused
the scanned copy of the case record as well as the case diary.
As per the allegation, the accused petitioners had killed the father of the
informant and the dead body of the deceased was also set on fire, trying to
disappear the evidence of offence. From the record as well as from the
submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the
learned Addl. P.P., Assam, it is seen that out of nine numbers of prosecution
witnesses, five have already been examined i.e. all the independent witnesses
were examined by the prosecution and only the official witnesses are left to be
Page No.# 4/5
examined.
On perusal of the evidence on record, it is seen that there are sufficient
incrimination in the evidence of the PW.1 and PW.2, though there are no such
incrimination in the evidence of the independent witnesses i.e. PW.4 and PW.5.
It is also a fact that at the time of passing the earlier bail order, it was observed
that the probability of influencing some of the vital witnesses was there but at
this stage, it is seen that two other independent witnesses are examined by the
prosecution.
But considering the other evidence on record and the materials in the case
diary, it is seen that these two accused petitioners got arrested by the
Investigating Officer from the State of West Bengal only by tracing out their
locality through the help of IMEI number of the mobile handset of the deceased.
Thus the probability of absconding of the present two accused petitioners
cannot be denied at this stage, who hails from another State and that too their
locations could be traced out with the help of their mobile hand set.
The Division Bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Deepak Yadav vs.
State of Uttar Pradesh and another , reported in (2022) 8 SCC 559 had observed
that :-
"21. As reiterated by the two-Judge Bench of this Court in Prasanta Kumar
Sarkar Vs. Ashish Chatterjee and another, it is well-settled that the factors to be
borne in mind while considering an application for bail are:
(i) whether there is any prima facie or reasonable ground to believe that the
accused had committed the offence;
(ii) nature and gravity of the accusation;
(iii) severity of the punishment in the event of conviction;
(iv) danger of the accused absconding or fleeing, if released on bail;
(v) character, behaviour, means, position and standing of the accused;
(vi) likelihood of the offence being repeated;
Page No.# 5/5
(vii) reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being influenced; and
(viii) danger, of course, of justice being thwarted by grant of bail."
Here in the instant case, it is seen that very serious allegation is being brought
against the accused petitioners of committing brutal murder of a person and in
the same time, it is also seen that after committing the offence, they fled away
to the State of West Bengal. Thus, the probability of absconding the petitioner
cannot be denied at this stage after their release on bail. Further, it is seen that
the accused petitioners are behind the bar almost three years and hence, the
learned Sessions Judge, Bilasipara is hereby directed to expedite the trial and to
examine the remaining witnesses within a reasonable period, preferably within
six months.
With the above observation, the present bail petition is hereby rejected.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
