Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010157802025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2300/2025 NIKHIL KUMAR BORAH S/O DHARMENDRA BORAH R/O 2 NO. CHARAIHABI GAON, P.O. TINTHENGIA, P.S. KHOWANG, PIN- 785675, DIST. DIBRUGARH, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE LEARNED PP, GOVT. OF ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR D J BORO, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 22.07.2025 1. Heard Mr. D. J. Boro, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. K. Parasar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Nikhil Kumar Borah, who has been detained behind the bars since 12.05.2025 (for last 71 days) in connection with Crime Branch P.S. Case Page No.# 2/4 No. 2/2025 under Sections 61(2)/147/308(2) of the BNS read with Sections 10/13 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 29.04.2025, one Dr. Sankar Jyoti Nath, Inspector of Police had lodged an FIR before the Officer-in- charge of Crime Branch Police Station, inter alia, alleging that three accused persons named in the FIR, namely, Y. Nemkha, Yaman Konyak and S. Hangmei Konyak were acting as Overground Worker/linkmen of the proscribed organization ULFA (Independent) in the Guwahati city and they are directly associated with James Asom, the self-styled Commander of ULFA(I). 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been detained behind the bars for last 71 days and he has not been named in the FIR. He further submits that all the three accused who were named in the FIR were granted bail by a Co-ordinate bench of this Court on 18.06.2025 in Bail Application No. 1895/2025. He submits that the accusation made against the present petitioner is similar to that of the accused persons who are already released on bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. He, therefore, submits that as the present petitioner stands on the same footing as that of the released accused persons, he is entitled to get bail in this case on the ground of parity. He further submits that considering the period of detention undergone by the petitioner, he may be allowed to go on bail as he is ready to co-operate in the investigation. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there is no embargo though the offence involved in this case against the present petitioner is also under Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, however, as only offences under Sections 10 and 13 of the said Act are shown to have been committed by the petitioner, no embargo under Section 43(d)(5) is there in this Page No.# 3/4 case. 6. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the case diary of Crime Branch P.S. Case No. 2/2025 and has vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the present petitioner. He submits that the present petitioner is an active member of ULFA (Independent) and he had been trained in Myanmar and Bangladesh and during investigation there are sufficient materials found against the present petitioner of having been involved in supply of arms and in process of recruiting fresh recruits to the proscribed ULFA (I) organization. He submits that the accusation against the present petitioner are very serious in nature and as he has been found involved in anti- national activities and as the investigation is yet to be completed his bail application may be rejected. 7. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and have gone through the case diary which has been produced by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor Procurator. 8. It appears from the case diary that in this case the accusation in the FIR has been levelled specifically against three accused persons named in the FIR. It also appears that the said accused persons have already been allowed to go on bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Bail Application No. 1895/2025 on 18.06.2025. Apart from that another co-accused, namely, Tapan Roy has been allowed to go on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 27.06.2025 in Bail Application No. 2131/2025. 9. Though, there are incriminating materials against the present petitioner in the case diary, however, it appears that the petitioner has been detained behind the bars for the last 71 days and considering the period of detention as well as progress made in the investigation, further custodial detention of the petitioner Page No.# 4/4 does not appear to be necessary for fair completion of the investigation of Crime Branch P.S. Case No. 2/2025, if the petitioner co-operates in the investigation. 10. For the aforesaid reasons, the above named petitioner is allowed to go on bail of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with one surety of like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup(M) 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. 12. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant