Jasim Uddin Laskar and Anr. Vs the State of Assam — Bail and Remand | Gauhati HC (2026)

Jasim Uddin Laskar and Anr. Vs the State of Assam — Bail and Remand | Gauhati HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Release of both accused-petitioners (Jasim Uddin Laskar and Abu Salam) on bail of Rs.50,000/- each with one suitable surety of like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned concerned court, subject to conditions: (a) shall not abscond; (b) shall not hamper or tamper with the evidence; (c) shall be available for the remaining trial; (d) shall not in any manner cause any harm or harassment or injury of any kind to the victim or her family members; (e) shall not try to influence witnesses. Violation of the bail conditions to lead to cancellation of the bail. Case diary to be returned.

Issue for consideration

Whether the accused-petitioners, Jasim Uddin Laskar and Abu Salam — arrested 02.04.2025 and in custody for over one year, charge framed on 6-8-2025, with prosecution witnesses including the victim repeatedly failing to appear on the dates fixed — should now be released on bail notwithstanding the nature of the allegations.

Court's answer

Grant of bail: Taking a balanced view, the Court held that the accused should be granted bail at this stage, subject however to suitable conditions — even though, considering the nature of the allegations, it would ordinarily have been important that the victim and other important witnesses be examined before granting bail.

Ratio / Principle

Reasoning: Although the nature of the allegations made it important that the victim and other key witnesses be examined before bail, the continued delay in commencement of the trial, weighed against the incarceration of the accused, required consideration of the principles underlying Article 21.

Key takeaways

Operative terms: the accused-petitioners to be released on bail of Rs.50,000/- each with one suitable surety of like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned concerned court, subject to conditions — (a) shall not abscond; (b) shall not hamper or tamper with the evidence; (c) shall be available for the remaining trial; (d) shall not in any manner cause any harm or harassment or injury of any kind to the victim or her family members; (e) shall not try to influence witnesses — violation leading to cancellation of bail.ratio¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

GAUHATI HIGH COURT (Single Judge: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pranjal Das) — Order dated 15.07.2026 in Bail Appln./1123/2026: Subsequent petition under Section 483, BNSS, 2023 by accused Jasim Uddin Laskar and Abu Salam seeking bail in Badarpur P.S. Case No.64/2025, Sections 127(2)/74/75/76/3(5), BNS Act — FIR by the father of the alleged victim girl alleging that on a bus with no other passengers the driver and handyman tried to molest and rape her, she being later found unconscious and rescued. Petitioners arrested 02.04.2025; over one year in custody; charge framed 6-8-2025; earlier bail plea rejected 08.12.2025 (BA/3740/2025); per status report and TCR, the victim and other prosecution witnesses were never examined, no witnesses turning up on successive dates (last: 3-72026 and 13.07.2026). Holding that, though examination of the victim before bail was desirable given the allegations, the continued delay in commencing the trial vis-a-vis the accused's incarceration engaged the principles underlying Article 21, the Court took a balanced view and granted bail: Rs.50,000/- each with one surety of like amount, conditioned on no absconding, no hampering/tampering with evidence, availability for the remaining trial, no harm/harassment/injury to the victim or her family, and no influencing of witnesses; breach to attract cancellation. Petition allowed and disposed of; case diary ordered returned.