Dismissed¶27

Chandra Sekhar Sarmah v. State of Assam and Anr.

Gauhati HC15 Jul 2026Bail (Cancellation)/3/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gauhati High Court, bail cancellation application dismissed (16.07.2026, Bail (Cancellation)/3/2026, Susmita Phukan Khaund). Keywords: Section 483(3) BNSS 2023; Sections 74/79 BNS 2023; Nagaon P.S Case No.1142/2024; PRC Case No.144/2025; JMFC Nagaon; charge framed 13.11.2025; order dated 28.01.2026 permitting respondent no.2 to work as Punjab National Bank Manager in Uttar Pradesh; alleged contradiction of bail condition restricting travel outside District of Nagaon; permission obtained from trial court; no ground to cancel bail; petitioner Chandra Sekhar Sarmah; respondent no.2 Rajat Kumar Shrivastav.

What did the court decide?

Respondent no.2 left the jurisdiction of the Nagaon Court after obtaining permission from the Court of the JMFC, Nagaon, as clearly reflected in the order dated 28.01.2026. ¶26

Chandra Sekhar Sarmah Vs State of Assam and Anr. — Bail and Remand | Gauhati HC (2026)

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010054592026

2026:GAU-AS:9742

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

¶5

Case No. : Bail (Cancellation)/3/2026

¶6

CHANDRA SEKHAR SARMAH

¶7

S/O DULAL CH SARMAH, R/O AMOLAPATTY, M.B.B. ROAD, PS NAGAON SADAR, DIST NAGAON,ASSAM

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR

¶10

TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM

¶11

2:RAJAT KR SHRIVASTAV S/O LT JAGDISH SHRIVASTAV R/O AWAS BIKAS 2ND NEAR ADITYA CYBER CAFE PS SHERKOTWALI DIST GONDA (UTTAR PRADESH

¶12

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR SARFRAZ NAWAZ, MD A RAHMAN,R MALI,MR. SURAJIT DAS,MR A W AMAN

¶13

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM (R1), MS A HUSSAIN (R2),MR M RAHMAN (R2),DARAK ULLAH (R2),SABRISH AHMED (R2)

¶14

Page No.# 2/3

¶15

BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND

¶16

ORDER

¶17

16.07.2026

¶18

Heard Mr. A. Tarafder, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel, Mr. S. Ahmed is present for the respondent no.2. Also heard Mr. M.P Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.

¶19

The petitioner, namely, Chandra Sekhar Sarmah , has filed this application under Section 483(3) BNSS, 2023 seeking cancellation of bail of respondent no.2, namely, Rajat Kumar Shrivastav.

¶20

The petitioner has prayed for cancellation of bail granted to respondent no.2 vide order dated 13.12.2024 and order dated 06.06.2025 in PRC Case No.144/2025 arising out of Nagaon P.S Case No.1142/2024 under Sections 74/79 BNS, 2023 . This case is pending in the Court of learned JMFC, Nagaon.

¶21

The allegation against the respondent no.2 is that he made obscene gestures towards the wife of the petitioner which prompted the petitioner’s wife to slap the respondent no.2. This, in turn, triggered an altercation, following which several persons gathered at the place of occurrence. It is further alleged that the respondent no.2 also attempted to commit sexual assault on the wife of the petitioner in presence of the gathering. An FIR was thereafter lodged and the aforesaid case was registered. Subsequently, vide the impugned order dated 13.12.2024, the petitioner was allowed to remain on previous bail after submission of the charge-sheet.

¶22

Page No.# 3/3

¶23

On 13.11.2025, charge under Section 74/79 was framed against the respondent no.2 by the learned JMFC, Nagaon. It is submitted that the conditions imposed upon him have been contradicted by the learned trial court vide order dated 28.01.2026, whereby and whereunder the respondent no.2 was allowed to attend his duty as a Bank Manager in the State of U.P without taking leave of the Court.

¶24

It is emphasised by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the said order is contradictory, as earlier the petitioner was directed not to leave the jurisdiction of the District of Nagaon without prior permission of the Court. On this ground, it is submitted that the Court has contradicted its own earlier order and the petitioner has, therefore, prayed for cancellation of bail.

¶25

The learned counsel for the respondent no.2, Mr. S. Ahmed has drawn the attention of this Court to the order dated 28.01.2026, where the Court modified the order and allowed the respondent no.2 to work as a Manager in Punjab National Bank in the State of U.P.

¶26

I have also scrutinised the order dated 28.01.2026. The respondent no.2 has now left the jurisdiction of the Nagaon Court after obtaining permission from the Court of the JMFC, Nagaon, which has been clearly reflected in the order dated 28.01.2026. Thereby, there appears to be no ground to cancel the bail of the respondent no.2.

¶27

In view of the foregoing discussions, this petition is dismissed.

¶28

JUDGE

¶29

Comparing Assistant

Chandra Sekhar Sarmah v. State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandra Sekhar Sarmah v. State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Urmila Tiwari and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam

Abdur Roshid Miah Vs the State of Assam

Joydeb Pujari Vs the State of Assam

Sahil Ali Ahmed Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Shahidul Hoque Vs the State of Assam

Mostafijur Rahman @ Matu and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and Anr.