Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010119442025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1261/2025 SANU TARAFDAR S/O SUBASH TARAFDAR R/O JANEMUKH P.S. ABHAYAPURI DIST. BONGAIGAON, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S M ABDULLAH P, MD IMRAN,MD R ISLAM,MS F HUSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER 12.08.2025 1. Heard Ms. F. Hussain, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. P. Goswami, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam. Page No.# 2/3 2. This application under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Sanu Tarafdar, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Abhayapuri P.S. Case No. 95/2024, under Sections 419/420/406/409 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 26.03.2024, one Morjina Khatun had lodged an FIR before the In-Charge of Lengtisinga police outpost under Abhayapuri police station, inter alia, alleging that the informant had opened an account at the Customer Service Point Branch of State Bank of India, which belongs to the accused No. 1 named in the FIR. 4. It is stated in the FIR that though the informant had deposited the total amount of Rs. 5, 99,954/-in his account in the said Customer Service Point, however, when he went to the State Bank of India, Lengtisinga Branch to withdraw money, he was informed that only Rs. 2000/-(Rupees Two Thousand only) is available in his account. 5. It is further submitted that the accused petitioner though named in the FIR but he was only an employee of the CSP owned by accused Nos. 1 and 2 of the FIR. The main allegations are against the said two owners who are stated to be husband and wife. It is further stated that pursuant to the interim order, the petitioner appeared before the Investigating Officer and his statement was recorded. 6. The Case diary, as called for, is placed before the Court. 7. Mr. D. P. Goswami, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, submits that the case diary shows that the petitioner appeared before the investigating officer and got his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. in terms of the interim pre-arrest bail granted earlier. 8. Accordingly, the interim pre-arrest bail granted vide order, dated 06.06.2025 Page No.# 3/3 is hereby made absolute, subject to the following conditions- (i) That the petitioner shall co-operate in remaining investigation; and (ii) 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 of the anticipatory bail application. JUDGE Comparing Assistant