Disposed

Anowar Hussain @ Ganesh v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC8 Mar 2026AB/483/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought pre-arrest bail for alleged assault and extortion of Rs 10 lakh from the informant's husband by persons in police uniform. Noting the long-running feud between the parties and absence of any injury to the victim, the court granted pre-arrest bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners enlarged on pre-arrest bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs 20,000/- with one local surety, subject to appearing before Trial Court and not influencing witnesses.

Anowar Hussain @ Ganesh Vs the State of Assam — Anticipatory Bail | Gauhati HC (2026)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010038802026

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : AB/483/2026

¶5

ANOWAR HUSSAIN @ GANESH S/O- LATE JABBAR ALI. R/O- VILL.- SANIADI, P.S.- HAJO, DIST.- KAMRUP, ASSAM

¶6

2: RUBUL ALI S/O- LATE JABBAR ALI. R/O- VILL.- SANIADI P.S.- HAJO DIST.- KAMRUP ASSAM 3: REZAUL HUSSAIN @ CHINTU S/O- ANOWAR HUSSAIN @ GANESH. R/O- VILL.- SANIADI P.S.- HAJO DIST.- KAMRUP ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY PP, ASSAM.

¶7

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. J I BORBHUIYA, MRS. K H CHOUDHURY,MR. N ALI,MR A HOSSAIN

¶8

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,

¶9

Page No.# 2/4

¶10

BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN

¶11

ORDER

¶12

Date : 09.03.2026

¶13

Heard Mr. J.I. Borbhuiya, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶14

By this application, the petitioners have prayed for bail in connection with Hajo P.S. No. 506/2025 registered under Section 115(2)/126(2)/191(2)/191(3) as well as 308(3) of the BNS, 2023.

¶15

The case relates to FIR which is lodged on 24.10.2025 by the informant stating inter alia that on 23.10.2025 at about 09:10 pm, when her husband reached a particular place, the petitioners along with five others stopped her husband and beat him up. It was also alleged that the persons in police uniform pointed the gun at her husband and another accused persons had slapped her husband. It is also alleged that accused demanded Rs. 10,00,000/- from the husband of the informant and that the accused wanted to drag her husband but due to timely intervention of the villagers they could not do so.

¶16

Mr. J.I. Borbhuiya, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits

¶17

that before the instant FIR, where the petitioners were arrayed as accused person had lodged FIR against the informant’s side on 22.02.2023 stating

¶18

Page No.# 3/4

¶19

inter alia that the accused persons after having verbal altercation with the workers regarding construction of a wall, they attacked his son with sharp weapons and that they caused injury on the head of his son.

¶20

Mr. J.I. Borbhuiya, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also places another FIR lodged on 25.10.2025 by the wife of the petitioner no.1 stating inter alia that the accused persons there in had attacked her son namely petitioner no.3 due to the enmity of both the sides and as such he submits that the present FIR has been lodged as a revenge by the informant concerned.

¶21

Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, however, submits that the instant FIR projects serious case in as much as the accused persons in police uniform had stopped her husband and beat him up and had demanded Rs. 10,00,000/- and tried to take him away.

¶22

As such, seeing the gravity of the offence, the counsel placed for calling of the case diary.

¶23

On consideration of the submissions made at the bar, more so the fact that the case has been continuing between the parties since long and that no injury has been revealed from the First Information Report on the victim much less grievous injury, this Court finds it fit to enlarge the petitioner be released on pre-arrest bail on furnishing of a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with

¶24

Page No.# 4/4

¶25

one local surety of like amount to the satisfaction of Investigating Officer

¶26

under the following conditions:

¶27

i) The petitioner will appear before the Trial Court as

¶28

and when call for.

¶29

ii) The petitioner will not influence the witnesses

¶30

connected with the case.

¶31

Petition is disposed of.

¶32

JUDGE

¶33

Comparing Assistant

Anowar Hussain @ Ganesh v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anowar Hussain @ Ganesh v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hashim Uddin Laskar Vs State of Assam

Uday Sankar Senapati Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Jaideep Bhuyan Vs the State of Nagaland and Anr.

Niron Neog @ Niran Kumar Neog Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Shri Upendra Mahapatra Vs the State of Assam

Sri Utpal Hazarika Vs the State of Assam