Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010150102025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2197/2025 ARINDAM BHARADWAJ SON OF LATE BOLON SHARMA R/O G.B. ROAD, ARENGAPARA, OPPOSITE YAMAHA DEALER, WARD NO. 1, P.S. GOLAGHAT, DIST. GOLAGHAT, ASSAM, PIN-785621. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B K MAHAJAN, MR. P K DAS,MR. D DEKA,MR. A CHAUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 17.07.2025 1. Heard Mr. B. K. Mahajan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. K. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This application under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Arindam Bhardwaj who has been detained behind the bars since 27.06.2025 (for last 21 days) in connection with Nagaon P.S. Case No. 949/2024 Page No.# 2/3 under Sections 120(B)/420/408/468/471 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that 25.09.2024, one Arish Ahmed, Authorized Signatory of Area Manager, East, ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Company Limited had lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-charge of Nagaon Police Station, inter alia, alleging that in respect of two policies Nos. 86722192 issued on 17th December, 2020 and 86721736 issued on 18th of December, 2020, though, the person whose life was insured had already expired on 24.06.2019, however, said fact was concealed in the proposal forms of the aforesaid two policies. It is also alleged in the FIR that the agent of the company had indulged in manipulation of documents and forging of documents and made false and fabricated proposal forms as well as the adviser confidentiality report to mislead the insurance company and gain unlawful advantage. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner, who is the agent of the sales service company, due to paucity of time, made verification regarding the life assured through online mode and therefore, he was unable to verify the fact that the person whose life was assured by the said two policies had already expired before submitting the proposal form. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in this case, the police has already seized the relevant documents, and the petitioner is also detained behind the bars for last 21 days and as such his further custodial detention may not be necessary for fair completion of the investigation. He, therefore, prays for allowing the petitioner on to on bail. 6. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the case diary and has submitted that though the petitioner has been detained behind the bars for last 21 days, however, there is an angle of criminal conspiracy in the alleged offence, which needs to be properly investigated. He further submits Page No.# 3/3 that there are sufficient incriminating materials against the petitioners on record and, therefore, he opposes the grant of bail to be petitioner at this stage. 7. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and have gone through the case diary of Nagaon P.S. Case No. 949/2024. 8. It appears from the materials on record that during the course of investigation, the relevant documents like original proposal forms of the policy involved in this case, original adviser confidential report, certified copies of the death certificate of the deceased and PAN card and other relevant documents have already been seized in this case. 9. It also appears that the petitioner has been detained behind the bars for last 21 days and considering the progress made in the investigation and period of his detention, this Court is of considered opinion that his further custodial detention may not be necessary, if he co-operates in the investigation. 10. In view of above, the above named petitioner is allowed to go on bail of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) with one surety of like amount subject to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagaon with following conditions:- (i) That the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person who may be acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts of the case before the Investigating Officer; (ii) That the petitioner shall co-operate in the investigation; 11. This bail application is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant