Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010097772025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1053/2025 RAHUL MISHRA S/O LATE KISHOR MISHRA R/O AHOM GAON, NEAR DPS SCHOOL, P.S. GARCHUK, GUWAHATI- 35,DIST.KAMRUP (M), ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE LEARNED PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R CHETRI, MR N MILI,MR U SAIKIA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER Date : 07.08.2025 Heard Mr. R. Chetri, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. S.H. Bora, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. By this petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Page No.# 2/3 Sanhita, 2023, the petitioner, namely, Rahul Mishra, has prayed for granting pre-arrest bail, apprehending arrest in connection with Basistha P.S. Case No. 151/2025, registered under Section 120(B)/419/420/468/417 of IPC. 3. The gist of the allegations in the Ejahar dated 02.02.2025, alleging by one Santanu Bora, is that his brother Sumanta Bora is the victim of impersonation and conspiracy on the part of the accused persons who fraudulently sold his patta land without his knowledge and to facilitate the same a power of attorney was also executed through forgery. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner purchased the land solely on the strength of an irrevocable general power of attorney executed by the informant’s brother in favour of the petitioner. It is further submitted that pursuant to the order dated 14.05.2025, the petitioner appeared before the investigating officer and recorded his statement. 5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the case diary has been received and submits on the basis of the subsequent report of the investigating officer, that it throws doubt the veracity of the statement of the petitioner and also indicating the discrepancies in documents. The investigation is in progress. 6. Considering the alleged offence and the materials available including the report from the investigating officer, I am of the considered view that for proper investigation of the case, the requirements of custodial interrogation of the accused cannot be ruled out. In this context, no such fetters should be imposed on the investigating officer to ensure that he gets to the root of the matter. 7. Accordingly, the pre-arrest bail application stands rejected at this stage. The interim protection granted earlier vide order 14.05.2025 stands vacated. Page No.# 3/3 8. The anticipatory bail application stands disposed of. 9. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant