Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010140082025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1486/2025 DHRUBAJYOTI GOGOI AND ANR S/O- LAMBODHAR GOGOI, R/O- HALOWAGAON, P.S- NAZIRA, DIST- SIVASAGAR, ASSAM 2: ANKURJYOTI KATHKOTIA S/O- NARESHWAR KATHKOTIA R/O- JOYNAGR P.S- JOYNAGAR DIST- SIVASAGAR ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY PP ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MD A RAHMAN, MR SARFRAZ NAWAZ,MR A W AMAN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER Date : 01.08.2025 Heard Mr. S. Nawaz, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. N. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam. Page No.# 2/3 This is an application filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners namely, 1. Dhrubajyoti Gogoi and 2. Ankurjyoti Kathkotia in connection with Badarpur P.S. Case No.103/2025 registered under Sections 61(2)/316(2)/318(3)/318(4) of the BNS, 2023. The allegation made against the petitioners is that on 10.06.025, the informant, Sudip Malakar lodged an F.I.R. alleging inter alia that he had received an order for 31.818 kgs of areca nuts from M/S IMRF Engineering and in this regard, he met with the accused petitioners for arranging transportation of the goods. Areca nuts worth Rs.52,80,000/- was loaded on a hired vehicle (AS 01 DC 9288) and the remainder of the areca nuts worth Rs.17,20,000/- was stored in the safe custody of the accused petitioners. However, on the following day, the driver of the said vehicle did not receive the informant's call and later his phone was found off. The informant met with the accused petitioners who asked him to wait for a few days. After one and a half months when nothing transpired, the informant came to Guwahati and met the accused petitioners who assured to compensate him and in this regard, a settlement agreement was executed between them and duly notarized on 29.04.2024 wherein the accused petitioners agreed to compensate the informant for Rs.70,00,000/-. In this regard, on 06.03.3025, the informant had lodged two F.I.Rs in Dispur Police Station regarding dishonor of Cheque No.000008 dated 08.09.2024 for Rs.70,00,000/- issued by the accused petitioner No.1 and another F.I.R. for infringement of the settlement agreement but no action had been taken on it. Thereafter, on 12.05.2025, the informant found the vehicle where he had loaded his areaca nuts but the nuts had gone missing. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the present dispute is of a civil nature relating to an agreement executed between the petitioner and the informant, whereby, the petitioners had committed to compensate the loss caused to the complainant on account of the damage caused to his areca nuts which the petitioners had undertaken to transport to Gujarat. It is admitted by the petitioners that the damage was caused due to their negligence and a cheque issued by one of the petitioners to the informant has been dishonoured. But instead of proceeding under the Negotiable Instrument Act, the informant had lodged the present FIR against the petitioners. It is further submitted that the petitioners are the victims of a conspiracy by the other accused persons as reflected in paragraph-7 of the bail application. It is further submitted that the petitioners had no intention to cheat the informant and the loss was caused on account of sheer negligence. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that there is sufficient material Page No.# 3/3 against the petitioners and their custodial interrogation is very much necessary. Referring to the bail objection submitted by the I/O, it is submitted that the petitioners in furtherance of their criminal conspiracy with other co-accused have cheated the informant by concealing the entire consignment of 31,818 kgs of areca nuts. It is stated that the deed of agreement was executed by the petitioner Ankurjyoti Kathkotia but the cheque was issued by the accused Dhrubajyoti Gogoi, which is a part of criminal conspiracy, to shift the responsibilities from each other in order to avoid paying the complainant. The CDR analysis of the phone numbers of the accused person also indicate their intrinsic connections and acquaintances with each other. More importantly, although the truck has been recovered, no areca nuts were found and although the accused persons have claimed that the consignment has been admitted, they could not show such a huge quantity of areca nuts to the informant, as the said consignment must have been lying somewhere even though in a damaged condition. Hence, it is necessary to interrogate the accused persons in custody, submits the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam. I find force in the aforesaid submission of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and on perusal of the case diary, I am of the view that it is not a fit case for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners and hence, the prayer stands rejected. Consequently, the Anticipatory bail application stands dismissed. Return the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant