Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010148592025 2025:GAU-AS:9852 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2218/2025 HEMARI TISSO S/O LT. LAKHIRAM TISSO R/O LUMDING ROAD, 11TH KILO, P.S. DIPHU, DIST. KARBI ANGLONG, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N ALAM R K, MR. A RAHMAN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER 31-07-2025 Heard Mr. N. Alam R K, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. This is an application under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of bail to the accused/petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with Diphu P.S. Case No. 51/2025 under Sections 61(2)/338/339/341(2) BNS. Page No.# 2/3 It is submitted by Mr. Alam, learned counsel that the petitioner is innocent and his name is also not mentioned in the FIR. He is no way connected with the alleged offence. However, he was arrested in this case only on suspicion and since last 36 days he is behind the bars. He further submitted that some of the co-accused persons have already been released on bail by the learned Sessions Judge considering the length of detention and the case of the present petitioner may also be considered in the same footing and he may also be granted bail on the ground of parity. However, he is ready and willing to co-operate with the I.O. in further investigation of the case, if he is granted with the privilege of bail. Mr. Sarma, learned Addl. PP raised objection to the bail prayer of the petitioner and submitted that it is not at all a fit case to grant the privilege of bail to the petitioner. The offence which is alleged to have been committed by the present petitioner is very serious in nature, wherein, he not only produced fake and forged documents through the bailors for a declared foreigner before the SP(Border), but also forged the signature of the higher Government officials to prepare those forged documents. Mr. Sarma, learned Addl. PP submitted that one witness in her statement under Section 183 BNSS also stated that the petitioner is the main culprit who prepared the forged documents and used them in the name of two bailors, namely Rahul Terang and Sarkam Killing and also threatened them not to lodge any case against the present petitioner. Thereafter, the witness herself made a phone call to the I.O. giving entire details of the present petitioner along with other and then the present petitioner got arrested in this case. Page No.# 3/3 Accordingly, he submitted that there may be some other associates along with the petitioner and hence further custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be required to unearth some more facts and accordingly, he raised objections submitting that the bail prayer of the present petitioner may be rejected at this stage. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for both the parties and also considering the materials available in the case diary, wherefrom it is seen that the I.O. while arresting the present petitioner had collected sufficient incriminating materials against the present petitioner, as submitted by the learned PP and from the case diary, it further reveals that the present petitioner is fully involved in the offence, rather he is one of the main culprit in the entire offence, by obtaining the order from the Hon’ble High Court, he produced bailers before the SP(B) concerned for a declared foreigner, wherein in the name of the bailor some fake documents were produced. In view of the above, I do not find it to be a fit case to grant the privilege of bail to the present petitioner. Accordingly, this bail application of the petitioner stands rejected. Return the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant