Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010093722025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1428/2025 NAZRUL ISLAM S/O LATE ISHAQUE ALI R/O VILL- PANPARA DHUMARPATHAR P.S. PATACHARKUCHI DIST. BAJALI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S M ABDULLAH P, MD IMRAN,MD R ISLAM,MR. S RAHMAN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 16.05.2025 1. Heard Mr. S. M. Abdullah P, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Baishya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. 2. This application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the Page No.# 2/3 petitioner, namely, Nazrul Islam, who has been detained behind the bars since 13.04.2025 (for last 34 days) in connection with Pathsala P.S. Case No. 32/2025 under Sections 336(3)/340(2)/318(4)/337 of the BNS. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 12.04.2025, one Samujjal Jyoti Gogoi, ACS had lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-charge of Pathsala Police Station, inter alia, alleging that while scrutinizing the nomination paper during the Panchayat election in the district of Bajali, it was found that the petitioner had submitted suspected fake academic certificates along with his nomination paper for the said election. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that even if it is assumed that the allegations levelled in the FIR are true, the petitioner has been detained behind bars for the last 34 days, out of which 11 days he was on police remand and, therefore, considering the period of detention, this bail application may be allowed. 5. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the case diary of Pathsala P.S. Case No. 32/2025 and has vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner. He has submitted that there are sufficient incriminating materials in the case diary and it was also found during the course of investigation that the petitioner had given Rs.50,000/- to one of the co-accused to procure the fake certificates. It is also submitted that in the event of granting bail to the petitioner, he may evade the course of justice and may tamper with the evidence. 6. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the sides and have perused materials available in the case diary. 7. It appears that the investigation has been fairly progressed and the Page No.# 3/3 co-accused has also been arrested. It also appears that the petitioner is a resident of village Panpara in Dhumarpathar under the jurisdiction of Patacharkuchi Police Station and if he co-operates in the investigation, his further custody and detention does not appear to be necessary. 8. It also appears that he has been detained behind the bars for last 34 days, which is a sufficient period of time for conducting an investigation of the nature which is involved in the instant case. 9. Considering the above aspects, the petitioner is allowed to go on bail of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) with one surety of like amount subject to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bajali with following conditions:- (i) That the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any persons who may be acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts of the case before the Investigating Officer; (ii) That the petitioner shall co-operate in the investigation; 10. This bail application is accordingly disposed of. 11. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant