Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010150592025 2025:GAU-AS:11748 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1597/2025 ABDUL SALAM SHAH S/O LT. MOMIR UDDIN SHAH VILL- BORO BAGHJHAPA P.S. SUKCHAR DIST. SOUTH SALMARA-MANKACHAR, ASSAM,PIN-783135. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A Z AHMED, MR. M HUSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 01.09.2025 1. Heard Mr. A.Z Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. 1. By this application, the petitioner has prayed for pre-arrest bail in Page No.# 2/3 connection with Sukchar P.S Case No. 40/2025 registered under Section 61(2)/318(4)/316(2) of B.N.S, 2023. 2. The F.I.R dated 21.06.2025, reveals that the petitioner had taken an amount of Rs. 2 lakh 54 thousand from the informant with the promise that he would give a tractor to him. But it is alleged that the petitioner had neither handed over any tractor nor returned the money. It is also alleged that when the informant asked for the money from the petitioner, the petitioner abused him. 3. Mr. A.Z Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the instant case is purely of a civil nature and that incident had happened long before but the F.I.R lodged in June 2025. 4. Mr. B Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam submits that there are witnesses who had stated that money was taken by the petitioner and was not returned by him to the informant and neither he kept his promise of giving the tractor. However, Mr. A.Z Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was enlarged on interim bail on 15.07.2025 and that he had appeared before the I/O who had recorded his statement which is acceded to by Mr. B Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. 5. In view of the above made submissions and on perusal of the documents annexed with the bail application it is noticed that the petitioner had complied with the interim order and had gone within the stipulated time and got his statement recorded by the I/O. Page No.# 3/3 6. In view of the same and also specifically on the fact that the F.I.R was lodged very late, this Court deems it fit that the interim order passed in favour of the petitioner may be made absolute and the conditions provided in the said order dated 15.07.2025 should be complied with by the petitioner. 7. In view of the above, petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant