Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010159812025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1711/2025 HABIBAR RAHMAN SARKAR @ HABIBAR SARKAR S/O- LATE KASHEM SARKAR. R/O- VILL.- DHARMASALA PART-III, P.O.- DHARMASALA, P.S. AND DIST.- DHUBRI, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM, REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A RAHMAN, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 22.07.2025 1. Heard Mr. A. Rahman, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Kotoky, the learned Special Public Prosecutor, CM Vigilance Cell, Assam. 2. This application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, 1. Habibar Rahman Sarkar @ Page No.# 2/3 Habibar Sarkar, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Vigilance P.S Case No. 14/2025 under Section 61(2)/318(4)/316(2)/316(5) BNS, R/W Section 13(1)(a)/13(2) and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act,1988. 3. The gist of the accusation in this case is that on 17.04.2025, one Simul Sarkar and 6/5 others, had lodged an FIR before the Superintendent of Police, CM Vigilance Cell, Assam, inter alia, alleging the accusation of corruption against one Sri Surjya Barua, CDPO, Debitola, ICDS. 4. In the FIR, accusation has already been made against the petitioner of helping the main accused in collecting the legal gratification. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has received a notice u/s 35(3) of BNSS as whereby, he has been directed to appear before the I.O of the aforesaid case on 23.07.2025 and to co-operate in the investigation. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that since non-bailable offences are involved in this case, he apprehends that he may be arrested, if he appears before the I.O. 7. On the other hand, the learned Special Public Prosecutor has submitted that the date of appearance mentioned in the notice u/s 35(3) of BNSS has not yet lapsed and it is fixed tomorrow i.e. 23.07.2025 and if the petitioner appears before the I.O and co- operates in the investigation, there is no reason for arresting him and therefore, the apprehension of the petitioner is without any Page No.# 3/3 basis. 8. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties. 9. In view of the submissions made by learned Special Public Prosecutor, CM Vigilance Cell, Assam and also in view of the fact that the date of appearance mentioned in the notice u/s 35(3) of BNSS, which was served to the petitioner has not yet lapsed and therefore, the apprehension of getting arrested does not have any basis. 10. The notice u/s 35(3) of BNSS issued mainly when the I.O does not intend to arrest a person or when the custodial interrogation may not be necessary. 11. In view of above, this anticipatory bail application is disposed of without finding merit in it, with a direction to the petitioner to appear before the I.O in pursuant to the notice issued to him u/s 35(3) of BNSS. JUDGE Comparing Assistant