Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010103112025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1082/2025 SRI ANIL RAJKHOWA S/O- LATE NOMAL RAJKHOIWA. R/O- MAJARATI GAON. P.O- KAMPUR, DIST.- NAGAON, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY PP, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K BORUAH, MS. P BORAH,MR. M ALAM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS A HUSSAIN (INFORMANT),SABRISH AHMED(INFORMANT) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 23.05.2025 1. Heard Mr. K. Boruah, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. J. Baruah, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent as well as Mr. S. Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for the Page No.# 2/3 informant. 2. This application under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Anil Rajkhowa, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Kampur P. S. Case No. 50/2025 under Section 120B/420/468/471 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that one Dilip Paul had on 03.04.2025 lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-Charge of Kampur Police Station, naming two accused therein, namely, Bibha Bora and Anil Rajkhowa, inter-alia, alleging that the accused No.1, in conspiracy with No.2, has obtained the NOC, which was in the name of the informant and, thereafter, forging the same had utilized it for executing sale deed in favour of accused No.2. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that presently the prevailing system for obtaining NOC is online and therefore, the forgery may not be committed very easily. 5. He further submits that the NOC has been obtained on the joint application of the purchaser. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he is ready to cooperate in the investigation. 7. He also submits that his son, who was arrested in connection with this case has already been released on bail by this Court. 8. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that there are sufficient incriminating materials against the petitioner in the case diary. 9. He submits that there are also evidence of materials indicating that some other sale deeds were also forged by the present petitioner. 10. He further submits that the custodial interrogation of the present Page No.# 3/3 petitioner would be necessary in this case. 11. On the other hand, Mr. S. Ahmed, the learned counsel appearing for the informant has also vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the present petitioner on the ground that in the instant case i.e., Kampur P. S. Case No. 50/2025, the petitioner was earlier granted interim bail by the Court of the learned Additional Session Judge, Nagaon and when the petitioner was enlarged on bail, he tried to influence the investigation and also had threatened the informant and, therefore, his interim bail was vacated and the anticipatory bail was rejected by the Court of the learned Additional Session Judge, Nagaon. 12. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the sides and have gone through the case diary of Kampur P. S. Case No. 50/2025. 13. There are sufficient incriminating materials against the petitioner in the case diary. Moreover, it also appears that he has misused his liberty when he was granted bail by the Court of learned Additional Session Judge Nagaon in BA Case No. 627(N)/2025. 14. This Court is, therefore, of the considered opinion that this is not a fit case where the benefit of a favourable order under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 may be granted to the present petitioner. 15. This anticipatory bail application is, therefore, dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant