Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010068422025 2025:GAU-AS:3672 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/292/2025 SABBIR MIRDHA SON OF BASIT MIRDHA, RESIDENT OF RAMFALBIL, SERPHANGURI, KOKRAJHAR, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM, REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D CHOUDHURY, MR T CHAKRABORTY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 28.03.2025 Heard Mr. T. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. K. K. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent No. 1. Page No.# 2/3 This interlocutory application has been filed praying for correction of the typographical error in the order dated 26.03.2025, passed by this Court in Bail Appln. No. 544/2025. It is submitted by Mr. Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that though the present applicant was granted with bail by this Court vide order dated 26.03.2025, passed in Bail Appln. No. 544/2025, but, inadvertently, on the query of the Court, he had wrongly submitted that the bail bond and surety has to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, N.I. Act, Kamrup, Guwahati, instead of learned Sessions Judge, Kamrup(M), Guwahati and accordingly, he prayed that the same may be corrected in the said order dated 26.03.2025. In view of above of the submission made above and also considering the fact that the mistake being inadvertent in nature, I hereby allow the present interlocutory application. Accordingly, the order dated 26.03.2025, passed in Bail Appln. No. 544/2025, stands corrected to the extent indicated below: “Accordingly, it is provided that on furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) only with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Kamrup(M), Guwahati, the accused/petitioner, namely, Sabbir Mirdha, be enlarged on bail, subject to the following conditions: (i) that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when called for; (ii) that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or Page No.# 3/3 to any police officer; and (iii) that the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned Sesions Judge, Kamrup(M), Guwahati, without prior permission.” This order shall be treated as a part of the order dated 26.03.2025, passed in Bail Appln. No. 544/2025. In terms of above, this interlocutory application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant