Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010101312025 2025:GAU-AS:11108 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1158/2025 MRS SILIVIA BHADANI W/O- PAWAN KUMAR. PRESENTLY RESIDED AT- QTR NO.C-3, 1ST FLOOR, RESIDENTIAL COMPLEX, CDA, GUWAHATI, NARANGI, P.O.- UDAYAN VIHAR, GUWAHATI-781171. PERMANENTY R/O- LOHANI NIWAS, RAJENDRA PATH, NEW GODOWN SHANKAR SONAR LANE, GAYA, BIHAR-823002 VERSUS THE STATE THROUGH CBI , REPRESENTED BY THE RETAINER COUNSEL, CBI. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR D NANDI, H. KONWAR,B U LASKAR,A. ROY,MR. M KALITA Advocate for the Respondent : RC, CBI, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 20.08.2025 Heard Mr. D. Nandi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. M. Kumari, learned Standing Counsel for the CBI. Page No.# 2/5 2. By this application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 the petitioner, viz., Mrs. Silivia Bhadani has prayed for pre-arrest bail in connection with CBI ACB Guwahati Case No.RC 0172025 A0003 dated 03.04.2025 registered under Section 61(2) of the BNS and Sections 7, 7A,8, 9, 10 & 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. 3. The F.I.R. dated 03.04.2025 lodged by the DIG/Head of Branch, CBI ACB, Guwahati reflects that information wasreceived that Sr. Auditor, office of the Controller of Defence Accounts, Udayan Vihar, Narangi, Shri Mrinmoy Ghosh is indulging in corrupt practices by demanding and accepting undue advantage from private contractors and vendors for ensuring passing and payment of the official bills. Information was also received that Smti. Sabita Chamaria, owner of companies had sent a message to the said Senior Auditor as to the payment of her bills and further as to how she would give the money to him for passing of the same. It is also reflected that said Smti. Chamaria informed the said Senior Auditor that her employee would deliver bribe amount to him near his office. It is also reflected in the F.I.R. that Sri Mrinmoy Ghosh is in the habit of demanding and accepting undue advantage from the parties concerned for passing of bills. On the said information that the Senior Auditor along with the owners of different companies have entered into a criminal conspiracy in demanding and accepting undue advantage, the Page No.# 3/5 said case was registered under the aforesaid sections of law. 4. Mr. D. Nandi, learned counsel for the petitioner submits before this Court that as far as the petitioner is concerned, there is no allegation against her in the F.I.R. although in the F.I.R. it is written that there are some unknown persons who are also involved in the conspiracy. He further submits that vide order dated 30.07.2025 the petitioner was granted an interim bail with the condition that she should go and appear before the I.O. and give her statement and in compliance of the same, the petitioner had gone and given her statement which was recorded by the I.O. As such, the learned counsel prays that there is compliance of the conditions of the interim bail and therefore, interim bail granted to the petitioner may be made absolute by this Court. 5. Ms. M. Kumari, learned counsel for the CBI submits that there are enough materials in the Case Diary showing the complicity of the petitioner in the aforesaid offence. She submits that the petitioner was dealing with the GEM Portal and she has access to the applications and the bills submitted for payment and that the demand made by her through telephone is reflected in the statements of the witnesses. It is reflected that the petitioner has made a demand through Nabin Chamaria for processing the bills. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused Page No.# 4/5 the records. 7. It is settled position of law that to prove an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act both demand and acceptance by the accused person has to be proved. There is no materials on record showing that the petitioner had ever accepted money from the parties for processing the bills or passing the same. There are materials in the shape of the statement of the co-accused that demand was made by her. Further, in terms of the interim order, it is noticed that the petitioner had complied with the conditions and have appeared before the Investigating Officer and has given her statement before him. 8. As such, in view of the same, it is in the opinion of this Court that the interim pre-arrest bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated 30.07.2025 may be made absolute on following the conditions mentioned therein and on the following further conditions :- (1) That the petitioner will appear before the I.O. as and when called for and shall cooperate with the investigation of the case. (2) That the petitioner will not leave the jurisdiction of the learned Special Judge, CBI without the permission of the said Court. Page No.# 5/5 (3) That the petitioner will deposit her Passport, if any, to the arresting authority. The Bail Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant