Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010091572025 2025:GAU-AS:10255 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1007/2025 MD MANJUL HOQUE S/O LATE MOZAMIL HOQUE R/O VILL- DURDURIA, P.O. CHENGELIAJHAR SIPAJHAR, P.S. SIPAJHAR, DIST. DARRANG, ASSAM, PIN-784145 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S N TAMULI, MS. A BEGUM,MS. P K ZANNAT Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 06-08-2025 Heard Mr. S.N. Tamuli, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of State respondent. Page No.# 2/3 2. This is an application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 for granting pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, namely, Md. Manjul Hoque in connection with Tezpur P.S. Case No. 219/2025 (with corresponding G.R. No. 519 of 2025) under Sections 127/309(4) and 3(5) of BNS (State of Assam –Vs- Md. Manjul Hoque). 3. Case Diary received. Perused the same. 4. It is submitted by Mr. Tamuli, the learned counsel for the petitioner that the present accused/petitioner had obtained the order of interim pre-arrest bail on 02.06.2025 and in pursuant to the said order he appeared before the police station / IO and his statement was also recorded in connection with the case. However, when he appeared before the I/O, he was arrested in connection with Tezpur P.S. Case No. 270/2025 on 09.06.2025 itself and since then he is in custody in connection with Tezpur P.S. Case No. 270/2025. However, the present accused/petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate in the further investigation of this case. But, I/O had not asked for further interrogation while he was in custody in connection with the above mentioned case. 5. Mr. Borthakur, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted in this regard that the accused/petitioner appeared before the I/O on 09.06.2025 and accordingly his statement is also recorded in connection with the present case. But, there are sufficient incriminating material against the present accused/petitioner who not only kidnapped the informant but also demanded ransom and thereafter total amount of Rs. 3,80,345/- has been transferred in his own account from the account of the informant. Accordingly, he submits that considering the nature of offence, custodial interrogation may be required for Page No.# 3/3 the purpose of investigation. 6. Hearing the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides, I have also perused the case record and Case Diary. It is seen that there are some incriminating materials collected by the I/O. The statement of the petitioner is also recorded by the I/O as he appeared before the I/O after obtaining the order of interim pre-arrest bail. But, at the same time it is also an admitted fact that though the accused/petitioner was in custody in connection with the Tezpur P.S. Case No. 270/2025, but the I/O never prayed for any custodial interrogation or never prayed for any interrogation inside the jail premises for the purpose of investigation. 7. In view of this, considering all aspects of the case, I find it a fit case to extend the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the present petitioner. Hence, the order of interim pre-arrest bail dated 02.06.2025 is hereby made absolute under the same terms and conditions. JUDGE Comparing Assistant