Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010118192025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1226/2025 MD. IBRAHIM ALI S/O- GOLAM HUSSAIN @ MD. GOLAM ALI. R/O- VILL.- TAMULDI, P.S.- BOKO, DIST,- KAMRUP, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE LD. PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N UDDIN, MD. SAFIQUL ISLAM,MR S K CHHETRY,MR. M ISLAM,A. HOQUE Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER 01.08.2025 Heard Mr. N. Uddin, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also Heard Mr. R. R.Kaushik, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam appearing for the State respondent. This petition under Section 482 BNSS is filed for granting the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, namely Md. Ibrahim Ali, apprehending arrest in connection with Boko P.S. Case No. 83/2025 Page No.# 2/3 registered u/s 90(1) of the BNS, 2023. The Case diary, as called for, is placed before the Court. The gist of allegation is that the FIR was lodged by the brother of the deceased stating that the accused attempted to conduct medical termination to treat pregnancy of her sister at one Arunodoi Hospital and Surgical Centre without having any proper license and in that process his sister died. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the victim was earlier gone to Ayusundra Hospital which was not revealed in the FIR. Mr. Kaushik, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, submits that the case diary has been received in which the last endorsement of investigation is 10.05.2025. The post mortem report is available indicating the cause of death as hemorrhage. However, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed in granting bail to the petitioner contending that the petitioner committed criminal negligence by conducting medical procedure for which he was not authorized. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and have gone through the Case Diary of Boko P.S. Case No. 83/2025 which was produced by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. Considerable time has elapsed since registration of the ejahar on 21.03.2025. Seen the progress of investigation. In the circumstances, the investigation may not be hampered in any significant manner if the accused is granted anticipatory bail at this stage. Page No.# 3/3 On perusal of the case diary it appears that there is no incriminating materials against the present petitioner in the case diary at this stage to justify his custodial interrogation Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest, the petitioner, named above, shall be released on bail, in connection with the above noted case on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one local surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority, subject, of course, to the following conditions: (i) That the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 10 days; (ii) That the petitioner shall not hamper or tamper with the investigation in any manner; and (iii) That the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. Return the case diary. This disposes off the anticipatory bail application. JUDGE Comparing Assistant