Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010107192025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1661/2025 HARMOHAN BAISHYA ALIAS DHONTI BAISHYA SON OF LATE NILKANTHA BAISHYA, RESIDENT OF- BOGORIBARI, POLICE STATION- BARBARI, DISTRICT- BAKSA, ASSAM. 2: MOINA BAISHYA WIFE OF HARMOHAN BAISHYA RESIDENT OF- BOGORIBARI POLICE STATION- BARBARI DISTRICT- BAKSA ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R K PRADHAN, MR. A K SAIKIA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 09.06.2025 1. Heard Mr. A. K. Saikia, the learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. R. J. Baruah, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. Page No.# 2/5 2. This bail application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioners, namely, (1) Harmohan Baishya Alias Dhonti Baishya, and (2) Moina Baishya, who has been detained behind the bars since 07.04.2025 (for the last 64 days) in connection with Tezpur P. S. Case No. 206/2025 under Sections 179/3(5) of the BNS, 2023. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 01.04.2025, one S. R. Jain, I.P.S. had lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-Charge of Tezpur Police Station, inter-alia, alleging that on receipt of information through relevant sources regarding transportation of suspected trade currency through Tezpur area, a naka checking was arranged in front of Borghat Police Outpost. 4. During naka checking, a vehicle bearing Registration No. ML-05-M-0011 was intercepted and during search operation suspected fake currency of Rs.1,21,200/- was recovered therefrom. 5. In the same vehicle two accused persons, namely, Rajesh Das and Keshav Saraniya were found and they were arrested. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are in no way involved in the offence alleged in this case. He submits that the petitioners are not named in the FIR and nothing was found from their possession, however, they were implicated in this case only on the basis of the statement of the co-accused, who were arrested in this case. He also submits that though the petitioners were arrested on 07.04.2025, No grounds of arrest, in writing, were served on the family members of the petitioner. 7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the petitioners are detained behind the bars for last 64 days and considering the period of their detention they may be allowed to go on bail. 8. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has Page No.# 3/5 vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the present petitioners. He has produced the case diary of Tezpur P.S. Case No. 206/2025 and has submitted that there are sufficient incriminating materials against the present petitioners in the case diary. 9. He submits that there are materials to indicate that the present petitioners are the associates of the accused persons named in the FIR in doing the illegal business of fake currency. 10. He also submits that as regards the serving of the notice under Section 48 of the BNSS, 2023, since the relatives of the petitioner were the residents of Baksa district they were informed on the date of the arrest of the petitioner itself over telephone. 11. He also submits that the police of Tezpur Police Station had also sent the notice under Section 48 of the BNSS, 2023, through W. T. Message to the police of Barbari Police Station. 12. However, he submits that no service report regarding serving of written notice is there in the case diary. 13. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and perused the case diary produced by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 14. Though, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that notice under Section 48 of the BNSS, 2023 was sent through the W. T. Message to the concerned police Station for serving on the relatives of the petitioner, however, no such service report is there in the case diary. 15. It also appears that though the ground of arrest were reportedly informed to the family members of the petitioners over telephone on the date of their arrest, however, the Apex Court has clarified in the case of Vihan Kumar Page No.# 4/5 Vs. State of Haryana and Another reported in 2025 SCC Online SC 629 that even the relatives are entitled to get the written notice under Section 48 of the BNSS, 2023, hence, in cases where the relatives reside outside the jurisdiction of the police station where the arrest has been effected, it is the duty of the arresting authority that in addition to telephonically informing the relatives about the grounds of arrest they have to ensure that the written notices are also served out on the said relatives as soon as possible. 16. Be that as it may, in the instant case, the petitioners are already detained behind the bars for the last 64 days and investigation as regards them is almost complete. The investigation is pending as regards the other accused persons, hence this Court is of the considered opinion that if both the petitioners cooperate in the investigation, their further custodial investigation may not be necessary for fair completion of the investigation of Tezpur P. S. Case No. 206/2025. 17. In view of the above, both the petitioners are hereby allowed to go on bail of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only), each with one suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Sonitpur, Tezpur subject to the following conditions: i. That the petitioners shall co-operate in the investigation. ii. That the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person 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. Page No.# 5/5 18. This bail application is, accordingly disposed of. 19. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant