Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010124112025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/607/2025 BHARGAV PHUKAN S/O SRI DIPAK KUMAR PHUKAN, R/O HOUSE NO. 09, D. TAROO PATH, KRISHNAPUR, BELTOLA, GUWAHATI-781028, P.O.- LAKHIMANDIR, P.S.- BASISTHA, DIST- KAMRUP (M), ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M P CHOUDHURY, MR. S BATHARI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Linked Case : Bail Appln./2328/2018 BHARGAV PHUKAN S/O H/NO. 9 KRISHNAPUR BELTOLA D. TAROO PATH 2ND LEFT BYELANE PO LAKHIMANDIR GUWAHATI-781028 DIST. KAMRUP ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REP. BY THE SPECIAL PP Page No.# 2/3 ASSAM 2:THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER DIBRUGARH PS CASE 936/2016 ------------ Advocate for : MR D K MISHRA Advocate for : MR P P BARUAH(P.P. ASSAM) appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA ORDER Date : 25.06.2025 Heard Mr. M P Choudhury, the learned counsel appearing for the applicant. Also heard Mr. P P Dutta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam. 2. This interlocutory application has been filed with a prayer for modification of certain conditions mentioned in Bail Application No. 2328/2018. 3. In the said order, it was mentioned that the petitioner shall be present before the Trial Court on dates fixed for hearing. It was also mentioned in the said order that if they remain absent on the date of hearing, they should have to take prior permission from the court and in case of unavoidable circumstances for remaining absent, they should immediately give intimation to the court. The other condition was that the applicant would not leave the territorial limits of the Trial Court without the written permission of the Trial Court. 4. The applicant states that his father had a liver transplant and he was the doner. Therefore, he had to go outside the territorial jurisdiction of the Trial Court for medical reasons. Moreover, the father of the application is no longer fit to carry his routine business. Therefore, the applicant being his son, has to look after his father’s business and has to go out of the territorial jurisdiction of the Trial Court. 5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel of both sides. 6. Under the given circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the prayer of the applicant deserves to be allowed. 7. Therefore, the said order passed in Bail Application No. 2328/2018 stands modified accordingly. Page No.# 3/3 8. The applicant shall regularly appear before the Trial Court on each and every date of hearing and if he fails to do so, he shall inform the court through his lawyer. Moreover, no written permission would be required to go out of the territorial jurisdiction of the Trial Court. 9. This order shall form a part of the order dated 11.10.2018 passed by the court in Bail Application No. 2328/2018. The IA stands disposed of accordingly. JUDGE Comparing Assistant