Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010150992025 2025:GAU-AS:9955 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1743/2025 GUNAJIT DAS ALIAS MOON DAS SON OF LATE AMULYA DAS RESIDENT OF 2 NO. MATHGHARIA P.S. NOONMATI DIST. KAMRUP (M) ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR. U K BARMAN Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 01.08.2025 Heard Mr. H. Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. This is an application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, praying for grant of pre-arrest bail to the accused/petitioner, who is apprehending arrest in connection with Chandmari P.S. Case No. 175/2025, under Sections 319(2)/308(5)/351(3)/296/ 3(5) of the BNS, 2023. 3. Case Diary has been received and I have perused the same. 4. It is submitted by Mr. Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner, that the present accused/petitioner is innocent and no way connected in the alleged offence. However, it is a fact that he, being an employee under the committee, collected the taxes from the vendors of the market and for which, he was also Page No.# 3/5 paid salary. That apart, he has not committed any such offence as alleged in the F.I.R., nor he ever made any threatening to any of the vendors. He also submitted that the said committee was functioning for last 9 (nine) years for collecting taxes from the market area and there was no other such complaint made by any person till the lodging of the present F.I.R., which even reveals from the statement made in the F.I.R. But, at present, some of the vendors made a complaint against the present petitioner, along with others, only with a mala fide intention and the new committee has already been constituted and they are now collecting the taxes from the said market area. However, the petitioner is ready and willing to extend his co-operation with the I.O. in further investigation of this case if he is granted with the privilege of pre-arrest bail. 5. Mr. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, submitted in this regard that from the materials available in the Case Diary, it reveals that the present accused/petitioner is also involved in the alleged offence and he used to illegally collect taxes from the vendors on the instruction of one of the co- accused, namely, Biju Das @ Babu. Further he submitted that the present petitioner also used to demand exorbitant amount in the name of taxes, though they were not authorized by any authority to collect the taxes. Accordingly, Mr. Borthakur raised objection and submitted that the anticipatory bail prayer of the present petitioner may not be considered at this stage. 6. After hearing the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides, I have also perused the case record and the Case Diary. It is a fact that the present accused/petitioner is also associated with the other co-accused persons Page No.# 4/5 and they used to make some illegal demand from the vendors. In the same time, it also cannot be denied that prior to lodging of the F.I.R., the present petitioner, along with other associates, were running the business of collecting taxes from the vendors in the said market area for last 9 (nine) years without any complaint from any corner. 7. In view of the above aspects of the case and also considering the statement made in the F.I.R., I find that custodial interrogation of the present accused/petitioner is not necessary in this case and therefore, I find it a fit case to extend the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the accused/petitioner. 8. Accordingly, it is provided that in the event of arrest of the accused/petitioner, namely, Gunajit Das @ Moon Das, in connection with Chandmari P.S. Case No. 175/2025, under Sections 319(2)/308(5)/351(3)/296/ 3(5) of the BNS, 2023, he shall be enlarged on pre-arrest bail on his executing a bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) only with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority, subject to the following conditions: (i) that the petitioner shall fully co-operate with the investigation of the case and shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required in connection with the investigation of the aforesaid P.S. Case; and (ii) that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any Page No.# 5/5 inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. 9. The anticipatory bail application stands disposed of in terms above. 10. The Case Diary be sent back. JUDGE Comparing Assistant