Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010161972025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2353/2025 BIJAY KUMAR CHAMARIA ALIAS BIJU S/O LATE MAHAVEER PRASAD CHAMARIA, R/O MISSA P.S. SAMAGURI DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S M ABDULLAH P, MD IMRAN,MD R ISLAM,MS F HUSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS A HUSSAIN(INFORMANT),DARAK ULLAH (INFORMANT),SABRISH AHMED(INFORMANT) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 04.09.2025 1. Heard Mr. S. M. Abdullah P, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State Page No.# 2/3 respondent as well as Mr. S. Ahmed, the learned counsel appearing for the informant. 2. It appears from the court that the petitioner was granted interim bail by this court on 25.07.2025. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has cooperated in the investigation and his statement has been recorded by the Investigating Officer. 4. He also submits that the petitioner, while on bail, has never misused his liberty, and he is ready to continue to cooperate in the investigation and, therefore, he prays for making the interim bail as soon as possible. 5. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the case diary of the Samaguri P.S. Case No. 160/2025 and has submitted that the petitioner has cooperated in the investigation and his statement has already been recorded. 6. He also submits that the case is now pending for receipt of the FSL report in respect of the arms and ammunition sent for the FSL examination. 7. The learned counsel for the informant has submitted that the petitioner, after getting interim bail has been frequently threatening the informant. 8. However, he has failed to mention any specific date or time when such threatening was done. 9. He also submits that the informant has not lodged any FIR against the petitioner regarding the threat given by him to the informant while the petitioner was on interim bail. 10. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel both sides and have gone through the case diary of the Samaguri P.S. Case No. 160/2025. Page No.# 3/3 11. It appears from the Court that there is nothing in the case diary to indicate that the petitioner has abused his liberty while he was on interim bail. 12. It also appears that the investigation has barely progressed and for the purpose of investigation, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary. 13. As regards the submissions made by the learned counsel for the informant regarding threat given by the petitioner, it appears that no written objection has been filed by the petitioner, filed by the informant. Neither any specific dates of alleged threat has been mentioned by the leaned counsel for the petitioner, nor any FIR has been filed in this regard. 14. Under such circumstances, this Court is of considered opinion that if the interim bail is made absolute with certain conditions, which may take care of the concerns shown by the learned counsel for the informant regarding abuse of liberty by the petitioner, his custodial detention may not be necessary. 15. In view of above, the interim bail granted to the petitioner by order dated 25.07.2025 is hereby made absolute with condition Nos.1 and 2 attached to the same order remaining intact. 16. It is hereby made clear that any violation of the above two conditions may be a good ground for cancellation of bail granted to the petitioner. 17. With the above observation, this bail application is, accordingly, disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant