Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010077792025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/886/2025 SRI SUMEN PAUL S/O LT SATYENDRA CH PAUL A PERMANENT R/O VILL. PAIKAN P.O. PAIKAN P.S. HAILAKANDI. PIN 7881554 VERSUS THE STATE THROUGH CBI REPRESENTED BY THE RETAINER COUNSEL CBI GAUHATI HIGH COURT AT GUWAHATI ------------ Advocate for : MR. S D PURKAYASTHA Advocate for : SC CBI appearing for THE STATE THROUGH CBI REPRESENTED BY THE RETAINER COUNSEL CBI BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK ORDER 19.05.2025 Heard Mr. S. D. Purkayastha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. M. Kumari, learned Standing Counsel, CBI for the sole respondent. 2) Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner, namely, Sri Sumen Paul, son of late Satyendra Ch. Paul, resident of village Paikan, Police Station-Hailakandi, District-Hailakandi Page No.# 2/3 has filed this application under Section 482 BNSS, 2023 praying for his pre-arrest bail in RC 0202025A0001 dated 25.03.2025, registered under Section 120B IPC and Sections 7/7A/11 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (as amended). 3) The Court earlier on 30.04.2025 granted interim pre-arrest bail to the petitioner in said RC 0202025A0001, pursuant to which, he appeared before the concerned Investigating Officer of the case and his statement has been recorded by the said Officer of the case. 4) Case diary has been placed before the Court today by Ms. M. Kumari, learned Standing Counsel, CBI for the sole respondent. 5) Prosecution’s case is that the petitioner conspired with one Sri Pinku Kumar, Manager (Scale-III), who was the Branch Manager of the State Bank of India, Ramkrishnanagar Branch, Karimganj, Assam in disbursing Xpress Credit loans to various borrowers during the period 2023-2024 in lieu of undue advantage and bribe that were collected by the petitioner and unknown others from the borrowers and thereby he collected an amount of Rs. 40,95,000/- and he credited about an amount of Rs. 12.10 Lakhs in the bank account of said Pinku Kumar, Branch Manager, SBI in his Canara Bank A/c and the remaining amount to the bank a/c of the wife of said Pinku Kumar from his bank account. After receiving such undue advantage and bribe amount from the petitioner and unknown others, said Pinku Kumar, Branch Manager of SBI tried to divert the said bribe amount in the bank accounts of his relatives and others. 6) The respondent/CBI has also filed objection with regard to the pre-arrest bail of the petitioner and relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Devinder Kumar Bansal Vs. The State of Punjab, reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 488. 7) Case diary indicates sufficient incriminating materials against the petitioner with regard to his involvement in the alleged crime. 8) It is seen that the investigation of the case is at a nascent stage. Considering the materials in the case diary and the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Devinder Kumar Bansal (supra), the Court is of the view that it is not a fit case to grant pre- arrest bail to the petitioner, namely, Sri Sumen Paul, son of late Satyendra Ch. Paul in said RC 0202025A0001 dated 25.03.2025, registered under Section 120B IPC and Sections Page No.# 3/3 7/7A/11 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (as amended). 9) Accordingly, this pre-arrest bail application of the petitioner, namely, Sri Sumen Paul, son of late Satyendra Ch. Paul in said RC 0202025A0001 dated 25.03.2025 stands rejected. 10) The interim bail granted to the petitioner Sri Sumen Paul, earlier on 30.04.2025 in said RC 0202025A0001 dated 25.03.2025 stands vacated/hereby recalled. JUDGE Comparing Assistant