Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010107502025 2025:GAU-AS:8036 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1126/2025 SAMIM AHMED @ SHAMIM UDDIN @ MOHAMMAD SHAMIM UDDIN S/O- FAYZUL HOQUE. R/O- BAGARSANGON, PATHARKANDI. DIST.- SRIBHUMI, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MRS. S D CHOUDHURY, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER Date : 17-06-2025 Heard learned counsel Mrs. S.D. Choudhury for the petitioner Samim Ahmed @ Shamim Uddin @ Mohammad Shamim Uddin, who has filed this application under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with prayer for pre-arrest bail as he is apprehending arrest in connection with Page No.# 2/3 Patharkandi Police Station Case No. 47/2025 under Section 61(2)/140(1) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. Heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam. 3. Two victims namely Sri Alal Uddin and Sri Faij Uddin were kidnapped and an FIR was lodged. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with kidnapping and demanding of ransom. 4. It is submitted that the petitioner’s name is not Samim Ahmed. It is further submitted that the petitioner is not at all involved in this case. It is further questioned whether any CCTV footage of the kidnapping of the victim being recovered? 5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has raised serious objection stating that there are incriminating materials in the Case Diary. The statement under Section 183 of BNSS clearly implicates the petitioner. 6. I have scrutinized the Case Diary. Indeed there are incriminating materials in the Case Diary against the petitioner. The merits of this case are not brought to the fore as investigation is still under progress. 7. I have considered the allegations and the facts and circumstances of this case. 8. It appears that investigation may be adversely affected if the petitioner is insulated by an order of anticipatory bail. Moreover, the gravity of the offence indicates that the petitioner is not entitled to anticipatory bail. At this stage, Page No.# 3/3 considering all aspects, petition stands rejected. 9. In terms of the above observation, this Anticipatory Bail application stands disposed of. 10. Send back the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant