Allowed

Sultan Ali Alias Suleiman Ali v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC14 Sept 2026Bail Appln./2717/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 483 BNSS for non-bailable offence under Section 306 IPC, the Gauhati High Court granted bail noting the petitioner's absence due to COVID lockdown. Bail is conditioned on furnishing bond with sureties and regular trial participation.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of the like amount.

Sultan Ali Alias Suleiman Ali Vs the State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Gauhati HC (2026)

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010196772026

2026:GAU-AS:13674

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

¶5

Case No. : Bail Appln./2717/2026

¶6

SULTAN ALI ALIAS SULEIMAN ALI

¶7

SON OF SURUJ ALI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- NALANIBARI, P.O.DUFFLAGARH, P.S.-HALEM, DIST.-BISWANATH, ASSAM

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF ASSAM THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, STATE OF ASSAM.

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : A B T HAQUE, MS. P DAS

¶11

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,

¶12

B E F O R E

¶13

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA

¶14

ORDER

¶15

15.09.2026

¶16

Heard Mr. A B T Haque, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K K Parashar, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶17

2. This is an application under Section 483 of the BNSS, for grant of regular

¶18

bail to the accused/petitioner, namely, Sultan Ali @ Suleiman Ali, in connection

¶19

Page No.# 2/3

¶20

with Sessions Case No. 21/2015 under Section 306 IPC pending before the

¶21

Sessions Judge, Biswanath corresponding to Halem Police Station Case No. 02/2014, under Section 306 IPC.

¶22

3. The petitioner is facing trial in Sessions Case No. 21/2015 before the learned Sessions Judge, Biswanath.

¶23

4. It is submitted that the petitioner had been regularly appearing in the case since the year 2015, but subsequent to the lockdown due to the COVID-19 pandemic, he could not appear and was expecting a summons from the Court after the lockdown, but since he did not receive the summons, he failed to appear.

¶24

5. It appears that upon his appearance, the petitioner was remanded to custody by the learned Court below by order dated 08.07.2026 and since then, he has spent 67 days in custody.

¶25

6. It is submitted that the petitioner will regularly participate in the trial in the event of his release on bail.

¶26

7. Having regard to the above, the prayer for bail is allowed on furnishing a

¶27

bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two sureties of the

¶28

like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Magistrate.

¶29

8. It is provided that the petitioner shall regularly participate in the trial,

¶30

Page No.# 3/3

¶31

failing which it would be open to the learned Trial Court to pass necessary

¶32

orders as may be warranted.

¶33

8. The bail petition stands disposed of as allowed.

¶34

JUDGE

¶35

Comparing Assistant

Sultan Ali Alias Suleiman Ali v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sultan Ali Alias Suleiman Ali 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