Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010117502025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1812/2025 RAJESH DAS S/OLATE RAJKUMAR DAS H. NO. 60, P.S. DISPUR, GUWAHATI, DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A GANGULY, MS. M ROY,MR T CHHETRI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 09.06.2025 1. Heard Mr. A. Ganguly, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. J. Baruah, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. This bail application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Rajesh Das, who has been detained behind the bars Page No.# 2/4 since 02.04.2025 (for the last 69 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 the 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 (present petitioner) and Keshav Saraniya were found and they were arrested. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been detained behind the bars for last 69 days and considering the period of detention, he may be allowed to go on bail. 7. He has also submitted that no notice under Section 48 of the BNSS, 2023 has been served on either friend, family member or nominated person of the petitioner. 8. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the fake Indian currency seized in this case were recovered from the possession of the petitioner and one another co-accused. 9. He also submits that thereafter, when the house of the present petitioner was searched by police, several other materials were found, which may be used for manufacturing the counterfeit notes. 10. He further submits that sufficient materials are there in the case study against the present petitioner and therefore, he vehemently opposes the grant Page No.# 3/4 of bail. 11. He also submits that some of the other co-accused persons are yet to be arrested and release of the petitioner at this date may hamper the arrest of the said accused person. 12. He also submits that as regards the serving of the notice under Section 48 of the BNSS, 2023 to the relative of the petitioner is concerned, he has been informed by the Officer-in-Charge of Basistha Police Station that when the said notice was intended to be served in the address given by the petitioner, it was found that no relative of the petitioner was found in the said address and therefore, the notice could not be served. 13. He further submits that there was no lapse on the part of the investigating authorities in issuing the notice under Section 48 of the BNSS, 2023 immediately after the arrest of the petitioner, however, it could not be served only because the address was not properly given. 14. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and I have gone through the case diary of the Tezpur P. S. Case No. 206/2025, which was produced by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor before this Court. 15. It is apparent that for whatsoever reason the notice under Section 48 of the BNSS, 2023 intimating the grounds of arrest of the petitioner was not served on the relatives/friend/nominated person of the petitioner. 16. On the other hand, it also appears that there are sufficient incriminating materials against the petitioner in the case diary as the fake currency seized in this case was recovered from his possession as well as some other incriminating materials were also found from his possession. 17. However, it also appears that the investigation has fairly progressed Page No.# 4/4 against him and it is pending only in relation to the other accused persons who are yet to be arrested. 18. It is also pertinent to note that the petitioner has been detained behind the bars for the last 69 days and two of the co-accused are granted bail today by this Court considering the progress of the investigation as well as the period of their detention. 19. In the case of the present petitioner also, considering the progress of the investigation as well as the period of detention of the present petitioner within the 69 days, this Court is of considered opinion that his further custody and interrogation may not be necessary for fair completion of the investigation if he cooperates in the investigation. The above-named petitioner is allowed to go on bail of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only), 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 petitioner shall co-operate in the investigation. ii. That the petitioner 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. 20. This bail application is, accordingly disposed of. 21. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant