Khokshed Miya Alias Nekai and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Assam — Bail and Remand | Gauhati HC (2026)

Khokshed Miya Alias Nekai and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Assam — Bail and Remand | Gauhati HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether bail ought to be granted under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 to the four accused/petitioners (Khokshed Miya @ Nekai, Saifuddin Ali, Juran Ali and Asar Ali) arrested in connection with Hajo P.S. Case No. 33/2026 (Sections 305/331(4), BNS 2023), in light of the case diary, their previous criminal antecedents, the gravity of the offence and the asserted need for further custodial interrogation, notwithstanding the length of detention already undergone and an earlier rejection order of this Court.

Court's answer

Further custodial interrogation of the petitioners may be required to unearth some more facts of the case.

Ratio / Principle

Having considered the materials in the case diary, the petitioners' previous criminal antecedents and the gravity of the offence, it is not a fit case to grant the petitioners the privilege of bail merely on consideration of the length of detention.

Key takeaways

The bail application of Khokshed Miya @ Nekai, Saifuddin Ali, Juran Ali and Asar Ali in connection with Hajo P.S. Case No. 33/2026 stands rejected.ratio¶8

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Application under S.483 BNSS, 2023 for grant of bail by four accused — Khokshed Miya @ Nekai, Saifuddin Ali, Juran Ali and Asar Ali — arrested in Hajo P.S. Case No. 33/2026, registered under Ss.305/331(4) of BNS, 2023, decided by the Gauhati High Court (Mrs. Justice Mitali Thakuria) on 12-03-2026. Petitioner-side counsel urged innocence, false implication and completion of recovery of all items, arguing further custodial interrogation was unnecessary; the Additional Public Prosecutor pointed to case-diary materials reflected in the Court's earlier rejection order and contended the petitioners were habitual offenders who had committed theft/burglary on many occasions. After perusing the case diary and weighing the materials therein, the petitioners' previous criminal antecedents and the gravity of the offence, the Court held that further custodial interrogation may be required to unearth more facts and declined to grant bail merely on the footing of length of detention. The bail application stands rejected and disposed of; the case diary was ordered to be returned. No precedents were cited and no monetary quantum arises.

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010051122026

2026:GAU-AS:3635

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

Case No. : Bail Appln./725/2026

KHOKSHED MIYA ALIAS NEKAI AND 3 ORS. S/O KUDDUSH ALI, RESIDENT OF - VILL -1 NO. KHALIYA MARI, P.S. - MUKALMUA, DIST. - NALBARI, ASSAM, PIN 781335

2: SAIFUDDIN ALI S/O AMIR ALI RESIDENT OF - VILL - NAPARA PAM P.S. - SIALMARI DIST. - NALBARI ASSAM PIN 781335 3: JURAN ALI S/O LT. BAHER ALI RESIDENT OF - VILL - TAPABORI P.S. - HAJO DIST. - KAMRUP ASSAM PIN 781102 4: ASAR ALI S/O JAMALUDDIN RESIDENT OF - VILL - TAPABORI P.S. - HAJO DIST. - KAMRUP ASSAM PIN 78110

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM.

Page No.# 2/3

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. S NAZNEEN, MS. P DAS,MR. K M HASSAN

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,

BEFORE

HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA

ORDER

12-03-2026

Heard Ms. S. Nazneen, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, for the State respondent.

2. This is an application under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of bail to the accused/petitioners, namely, (i) Khokshed Miya @ Nekai; (ii) Saifuddin Ali; (iii) Juran Ali and (iv)Asar Ali who were arrested in connection with Hajo P.S. Case No. 33/2026 registered under Sections 305/331(4) of BNS, 2023.

3. Case diary received. Perused the same.

4. It is submitted by Ms. Nazneen, learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are innocent and they were falsely implicated in this case. However, all the items have already been recovered from their possession and as such, their further custodial interrogation may not be required.

5. Mr. Sarma, learned Addl. PP submitted in this regard that there are sufficient materials against the petitioners in the case diary which have already been reflected while passing the earlier rejection order by this Court and he stated that the probability of committing same kind of offence in future also cannot be denied at this stage as they are the habitual offender as revealed from the materials available in the case diary.

6. Accordingly, Mr. Sarma submitted that only considering the length of detention, the petitioners cannot be released on bail, who are the habitual offender and had

Page No.# 3/3

committed theft/burglary on many occasions.

7. After hearing the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, considering the materials in the case diary, the previous criminal antecedents of the present petitioners and the gravity of the offence, I find that further custodial interrogation of the petitioners may be required to unearth some more facts of the case and accordingly, I do not find it a fit case to grant the petitioner the privilege of bail only considering the length of detention.

8. Accordingly, this bail application of the petitioners, namely, (i) Khokshed Miya @ Nekai; (ii) Saifuddin Ali; (iii) Juran Ali and (iv)Asar Ali in connection with Hajo P.S. Case No. 33/2026 registered under Sections 305/331(4) of BNS, 2023 stands rejected.

9. This bail application accordingly stands disposed of.

10. Return the case diary.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant