Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010150012025 2025:GAU-AS:9581 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2044/2025 ABU HANIF CHOUDHURY S/O- MOINUL HOQUE CHOUDHURY. R/O- VILL.- LALA PART-I P.S.- LALA. DIST.- HAILAKANDI ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP ASSAM. ------------ Advocate for : MS. A. MEDHI Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 24.07.2025 1. Heard Ms. A. Medhi, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam. Page No.# 2/3 2. This application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Abu Hanif Choudhury, who has been detained behind the bars since 06.06.2025 (for the last 49 days) in connection with CID P.S. Case No. 04/2025, under Sections 61(2)/318(4)/336(3)/340(2) of BNS, 2023. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 10.02.2025, one Bhaskar Jyoti Sarmah had lodged an FIR before the Additional Director General of Police, Criminal Investigation Department (CID), inter alia, alleging that certain miscreants are circulating a fake letter with forged signatures of the first informant to various divisions under the Water Resources Department. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is in no way connected with the offence alleged in the FIR. 5. She submits that the petitioner has not been named in the FIR. She also submits that the petitioner has been languishing behind the bars for the last 49 days and the maximum statutory period of detention for the offences involved in this case is 60 days under Section 487 of the BNSS, 2023. 6. She therefore, submits that as the petitioner is ready to co- operate in the investigation, considering his period of detention, he may be allowed to go on bail. 7. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner on the ground that the present petitioner is one of the main culprit in this case and he has Page No.# 3/3 collected several lakhs of rupees from prospective candidates directly as well as through the co-accused Jakaria Ahmed. He further submits that the investigation is still going on as several accused persons are involved in this case. He also submits that the investigation as regards the forgery and circulating of the fake appointment letter has not progressed much and therefore, grant of bail to the petitioner at this stage would hamper the investigation. He, therefore, opposes the grant of bail. 8. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and have gone through the Case Diary which was produced by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 9. On perusal of the Case Diary, it appears that the above-named petitioner is one of the prime accused of the offence alleged in this case. There are sufficient incriminating materials against the present petitioner in the Case Diary and as the investigation is pending at a very crucial stage, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the above-named petitioner at this stage. 10. This bail application is accordingly dismissed at this stage. 11. Send back the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant