Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010156632025 2025:GAU-AS:11024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1701/2025 ASHOK SANGMA AND 3 ORS. S/O BITENRA MARAK VILL- 48, RAMSAROBAR P.S. KAZIGAON DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM 2: SAMSING RABHA S/O SUBHARAM RABHA HOUSE NO. 07 VILL- TOKAPARA GAON PT.II P.S. KAJIGAON DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM 3: NUR ALOM SHEIKH S/O ABDUL GANI SHEIKH VILL- DUMURDAHA P.S. BAGRIBARI DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM 4: RAJIB RABHA S/O LATE BHUBAN RABHA VILL- SHUKANJHORA PT.II P.S. BAGRIBARI DIST. KOKRAJHAR ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Page No.# 2/4 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR K BHUYAN, R K TALUKDAR Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 19-08-2025 Heard Mr. K. Bhuyan, the learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. B. Sharma, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of State respondent. 2. This is an application u/s 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 for granting pre-arrest bail to the accused petitioners in connection with Bagribari P.S. Case No. 49/2025 u/s 316(2)/318(4)/336(3)/340(2)/61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. 3. Case Diary not received. Perused the same. 4. It is submitted by Mr. Bhuyan, the learned counsel for the petitioners that present accused/petitioners are innocent and they have not committed any such offence as alleged in the FIR. The insurance policy was issued in the name of the wife of the accused/petitioner no. 4 who died due to heart attack in the year 2021. Thereafter he being the nominee had claimed the policy amount and the accused/petitioner no. 3 who was an agent of the insurance policy and in the same time the petitioner nos. 1 & 2 are not at all involved in the alleged Page No.# 3/4 offence. The doctor also issued the death certificate which has been annexed in the present petition as Annexure-2 wherein it is stated that the said Prathani Rabha, the wife of the accused/petitioner no. 2 died due to severe chest pain and acute myocardial infection. Mr. Bhuyan accordingly submitted that the accused/petitioners are innocent and only on suspicion the FIR was lodged by the informant. However, all the petitioners are ready and willing to extend their cooperation in the further investigation of this case, if they are granted with the privilege of interim pre-arrest bail. 5. Mr. Sharma, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted in this regard that all these four accused/persons including some others are involved in the alleged offence. The present accused/petitioners had prepared a fake policy in the name of the wife of the petitioner no. 4 who died in 2018 and by creating some fake identity and some documents the policy is created and showing the accused petitioner no. 4 as a nominee of the policy they all claimed Rs. 9 lakhs as a policy holder. He further submitted that they not only created some fake documents to open the policy but also used the photograph of the daughter of the accused/petitioner no. 4 showing herself as Prathani Rabha and against the policy is obtained with the fake identity. He accordingly submitted that all the accused/petitioners are fully involved in the alleged offence and accordingly the petitioners are not all entitled the privilege of pre-arrest bail. Their custodial interrogation is very much essential to know the facts of the case and also other persons may be involved in the entire crime. Mr. Sharma accordingly raised vehement objection and submitted that the petition may be dismissed and the prayer of pre-arrest bail accordingly may be rejected. 6. Hearing the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides, I have Page No.# 4/4 perused the Case Diary and the statement made by some of the co-accused and the witnesses it is seen that all the accused/petitioners are fully involved in the organized crime wherein they have created a fake insurance policy by using the ID of Nur Alom Sheikh/the petitioner no. 3 in the present case and thereafter by obtaining the insurance policy and by obtaining fake death certificate and also after obtaining some signatures of some of the witnesses a fraudulent claim of Rs. 9 lakhs was made as the insurance claim showing the petitioner no. 4 as the nominee of the policy holder though there was no such policy exists in the name of the wife of the accused/petitioner no. 4. They also used the photograph of the daughter of the accused/petitioner no. 4 to make the fraudulent claim of the insurance policy . Considering the nature of offence, the way the offence was committed and the gravity of the offence, this Court is of the opinion that these petitioners are not at all entitled to get the benefit of pre-arrest bail and accordingly the same stands rejected. In view of above, this Anticipatory Bail application stands disposed of. Case Diary be returned. JUDGE Comparing Assistant