Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010138982025 2025:GAU-AS:9121 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1534/2025 HEMEN DAS S/O- LAKHI RAM DAS. R/O- VILL.- GARAL, NEAR MANASHA MANDIR, AZARA, P.O.- AZARA, P.S.- AZARA, DIST.- KAMRUP(M), ASSAM, PIN-781017 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K K DEKA, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 15.07.2025 Heard Mr. K. K. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. This is an application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of pre-bail to the accused/petitioner, who is apprehending arrest in connection with Dispur P.S. Case No. 507/2025, under Sections 316(2)/318(4)/336(3)/340(2)/61(2) of the BNS, 2023. Case Diary has been received and I have perused the same. It is submitted by Mr. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioner, that the present accused petitioner is innocent and no way connected in the alleged offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case by the co-accused without his involvement in the alleged offence. Rather, he is also a victim of the offence, though he has not filed any F.I.R. till date. However, he is ready and willing to co-operate the I.O. in further investigation of this case if he is granted with the privilege of pre-arrest bail. Mr. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, submitted in this regard that the present accused/petitioner is also involved in the alleged offence and he is the person through whom the candidates have approached the other co- Page No.# 3/4 accused, namely, Mintu Deka. He used to introduce all the candidates to said Mintu Deka and in association with said co-accused, Mintu Deka, they used to conduct false examinations and also issued fake appointment letters forging the signature of the higher authorities. He further submitted that there are sufficient incriminating materials in the Case Diary against the present accused/petitioner and his custodial interrogation will be required to unearth some more facts involved in the present case and hence, he raised objection and submitted that it is not at all a fit case to extend the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the present accused/petitioner. After hearing the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and also on perusal of the Case Diary and the Note of the I.O. as well as the statement made by the accused persons and the statement of the witnesses recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, it is seen that that the present accused/ petitioner is also involved in the alleged offence who used to introduce most of the candidates to the co-accused persons with an assurance to provide contractual job in the Assam Secretariat and thereby he cheated and misappropriated huge amount of money from the candidates in association with other co-accused persons. Thus, considering the nature of allegation brought against the present petitioner and also considering the incriminating materials available in the Case Diary, I find that the custodial interrogation of the present accused/petitioner may be necessary to unearth some more facts involved in this case and therefore, I do not find it a fit case to extend the privilege of pre- arrest bail to the present accused/petitioner and accordingly, the same stands rejected. Page No.# 4/4 In terms of above, this anticipatory bail application stands disposed of. Case Diary be returned. JUDGE Comparing Assistant