Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010165532025 2025:GAU-AS:10599 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2462/2025 MD SOHIDUL ISLAM SON OF LATE SIRAJUL HAQUE R/O NO. 1 NO. AHMEDPUR P.S. BIHPURIA DIST. LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B CHOWDHURY, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER 12-08-2025 Heard Mr. B. Chowdhury, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, for the State respondent. 2. This is an application under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of bail to the accused/petitioner, who was arrested in connection with Bihpuria P.S. Page No.# 2/4 Case No. 112/2025 under Sections 61(2)/318(4)/316(2)/3(5) of the BNS with added Sections 179/180 of the BNS, 2023. 3. Case Diary is placed before the Court. I have perused the same. 4. It is submitted by Mr. Chowdhury, learned counsel that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any such offence as alleged in the FIR. 5. However, it is alleged that Rs.7,70,000/- of denomination of Rs.500/- has been recovered from the petitioner which are alleged to be counterfeited currency. 6. The petitioner’s earlier bail application was rejected on 18.07.2025 with observation that further custodial interrogation may be necessary to unearth more facts in the case, but as per instruction of the petitioner, it is submitted that he has not been further interrogated. 7. Mr. Chowdhury, learned counsel submitted that only the counterfeited currency notes were recovered from the petitioner and no printing machine was seized from the possession of the petitioner and therefore, the offence may fall under Section 180 BNS, wherein the statutory period is 60 days. 8. It is further submitted that the present petitioner is in custody since last 74 days and considering his length of detention, he may be released on bail. 9. Mr. Borthakur, learned Addl. PP submitted in this regard that the petitioner is a habitual offender and against him there are two more cases which are still pending. 10. Mr. Borthakur, learned Addl. PP further submitted that as per the materials available in the case diary, it is seen that one printing machine was also recovered from one co-accused of the case, namely Sahil, though the seizure list Page No.# 3/4 is not available in the case diary. He further submitted that from the FSL report it is confirmed that the Rs.500/- denomination notes recovered from the possession of the petitioner are stated to be counterfeited and accordingly, he submitted that length of detention of the petitioner cannot be considered to grant bail to the petitioner. 11. On perusal of the case diary, it is seen that there are sufficient progress in the investigation of the case, but it is fact that after rejection of the bail application of the petitioner, he was not further interrogated by the I.O. However, the I.O. collected sufficient incriminating materials during investigation of the case. 12. Considering the submission of the learned counsel for both sides and on perusing the case diary, without going into the details of the merit of the case, only considering the length of detention undergone by the petitioner, I find it a fit case to extent the privilege of bail to the accused/petitioner. 13. Accordingly, the accused/petitioner, namely, Md. Sohidul Islam, be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand) only, with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned CJM, Lakhimpur, North Lakhimpur, 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 inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade Page No.# 4/4 him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. 14. With the above observation and direction, this bail application stands disposed of. 15. Return the Case Diary herewith. JUDGE Comparing Assistant