Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010152632025 2025:GAU-AS:11068 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1639/2025 PARVEZ HUSSAIN SON OF LATE IMRAN HUSSAIN, RESIDENT OF ROYAL ROAD , P.O. AND P.S. JORHAT, DIST. JORHAT, ASSAM, PIN-785001 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A R BHUYAN, MR S ABDULLAH,MR N Z CHOUDHURY,S LASKAR Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA O R D E R 20.08.2025 Heard Mr. A. R. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State Page No.# 2/3 respondent. 2. This is an application under Section 482 BNSS, 2023, praying for grant of pre-arrest bail to the accused/petitioner, namely, Parvez Hussain, who is apprehending arrest in connection with Jorhat P.S. Case No.308/2025 under Sections 308(5) of the BNS, 2023. 3. The case diary as called for, has been received and I have perused the same. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. A.R. Bhuyan, that the present petitioner is no way connected in the alleged offence. He further submitted that after obtaining the interim pre-arrest bail order dated 19.07.2025, the petitioner has appeared before the I/O and cooperated in the investigation of the case. Before obtaining interim pre-arrest bail also, he appeared before the I/O on receipt of notice issued on under Section 35(3) BNSS. He further submitted that there was a business transaction between the informant and the prime accused Gajanand (Gajju) Mundra and only for the said business transaction, there was a monetary transaction of around Rs. 47,00,000/- which was deposited towards the bank account in the name of R.D. Trading Co. of the prime accused. The present petitioner, who is also working as a social activist only interfered for settlement between the informant and the victim and only for that reason, he was asked to appear before the police station and accordingly, he cooperated in the investigation of the case. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the petitioner is still ready and willing to cooperate with the I/O for further investigation of this case, if he is granted with the privilege of pre-arrest bail. 5. Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has Page No.# 3/3 submitted in this regard that there was no such business transaction and basically, it is a case of honey trapping wherein Rs.47,00,000/- was demanded by showing some video clips and in the name of settlement, the present petitioner along with one Riyaz Ahmed also demanded money to informant. However, it is the fact that all the money transaction through the bank and the money was deposited in the name of R.D. Trading Co., the company of prime accused. However, the present petitioner has appeared before the I/O after obtaining the order of interim pre-arrest bail and his statement is accordingly recorded by the I/O. He further submitted that his further cooperation will be needed by the I/O in the interest of the investigation and he may be directed to appear before the I/O as an when his cooperation will be required. 6. Hearing the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and I have also perused the case diary and the note given by the I/O along with the case diary. 7. Considering all the materials available in the case diary, submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides, I find that it is a fit case to extent the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the present petitioner. Accordingly, the interim pre- arrest bail granted to the accused/petitioner vide order dated 19.07.2025 is hereby made absolute, on the same terms and conditions. 8. In terms of above, this anticipatory bail application stands disposed of. 9. The case diary be sent back. JUDGE Comparing Assistant