JUDGMENT 1. Heard Mr. S. Barman, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the State. 2. This application under Section 439 Cr.PC has been filed by the petitioners, namely, 1. Sri Paresh Bharali, 2. Sri Dip Jyoti Bharali, 3. Sri Pankaj Bharali and 4. Sri Janardhan Bharali, seeking bail in connection with Hajo P.S. Case No. 216/2020 registered under Sections 120(B)/325/302/427 of the IPC, wherein they were arrested on 10.03.2020 and since then, they are in custody. 3. From the FIR of the case, it is seen that when the husband of the informant on 05.03.2020 in the afternoon went to the house of Paresh Bharali, elder son of the petitioner No. 1 to receive his money that was payable by her said son, he was killed by the petitioners and their other associates injuring him severely on his person and that his dead body was found in the premises of the petitioner No. 1. 4. Perused the case diary along with the post-mortem report of the deceased placed before the Court by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 5. The post-mortem report of the deceased, Hare Krishna Kalita, husband of the informant, reveals that he sustained multiple injuries of different size on his face, lacerated wound on his right ear, contusion on his left frontal area of 5 x 3 cm, contusion of 6 x 5 cm on his left temporal area and contusion of 6 x 5 cm on his occipital area and his heart contained liquid and clotted blood. 6. As per the opinion of the doctor, as reflected in the post-mortem report, the death of the deceased was due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of multiple injuries, where all the injuries were caused by blunt forced impact, which were ante-mortem and homicidal in nature. 7. From the perusal of the case diary, it is seen that the independent witnesses, eye witnesses and the neighbours of the petitioners implicated them in assaulting the husband of the informant and riding of his scooty over his body, while he was lying injured in the ground in the premises of the petitioner No. 1 and, thereafter, destroying his said scooty. 8. 8. Finding sufficient incriminating materials against the petitioners named above in said Hajo P.S. Case No. 216/2020, this Court is of the view that their bail prayer, though they are in custody since 10.03.2020, cannot be considered. 9. Accordingly, this bail application of the petitioners, namely, 1. Sri Paresh Bharali, 2. Sri Dip Jyoti Bharali, 3. Sri Pankaj Bharali and 4. Sri Janardhan Bharali in said Hajo P.S. Case No. 216/2020 stands rejected. 10. This bail application accordingly stands disposed of.