Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010165972025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1841/2025 SRI CHANDAN PODDAR S/O- LT. NIRDEV PODDAR, R/O- RAILWAY COLONY, P.S. CHANDMARI, KALIBARI, BAMUNIMAIDAM, GUWAHATI-21, KAMRUP (M), ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP,ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D CHAKRABARTY, MS D.CHAKRABARTY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER Date : 11.08.2025 Heard Mr. D. Chakrabarty, learned counsel assisted by Ms. D. Chakrabarty, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Page No.# 2/4 2. This petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the petitioner, namely, Chandan Poddar, has prayed for granting pre-arrest bail, apprehending arrest in connection with Chandmari P.S. Case No. 37/2025, registered under Section 287/318(2)/317(2) of BNS, 2023 r/w Section 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 & Section 23(a) of Petroleum Act, 1934. 3. The gist of the allegation in the Ejahar dated 15.02.2025 is that the petitioner illegally prossessing approximately 1200 ltr. SK Oil in Bamunimaidan Ralway Colony Hut, Kalibari Quarter No. 812. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that except 317(2) of BNS, the other sections are bailable including the section 6 of Petroleum Act, 1934. It is also submitted that all the ingredients of the non-bailable provisions are not attracted in the facts. It is further submitted that the petitioner’s father had a genuine kerosene license and in respect of the same, some documents have been annexed. Though, after death of the father of the petitioner, petitioner sometimes used to visit the oil depot to collect oil and sell and in this regard some stocks are accumulated. 5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the case diary and submits that the investigation also reveals on similar lines and it is not indicated any aspect of theft; though oil in question taken in that manner would be illegal act as per other law. The petitioner was also granted interim bail by the learned trial court, pursuant to which, the petitioner appeared before the investigating officer and his statement recorded. However, later on, the said bail petition came to be rejected. Page No.# 3/4 6. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. I have also perused the case diary. 7. In the backdrop of these contentions, the materials prima facie indicate that Section 317(2) of BNS pertaining to knowingly receiving property does not seem to be attracted herein this case. 8. Considering this aspect as well other aspects indicated above, this Court finds it fit to allow the petition. 9. Accordingly, it is provided that in the event of arrest of the petitioner, named above, in connection with Chandmari P.S. Case No. 37/2025, registered under Section 287/318(2)/317(2) of BNS, 2023 r/w Section 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 & Section 23(a) of Petroleum Act, 1934, he shall be released on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- with a suitable surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the arresting authority. 10 The direction for pre-arrest bail is subject to the conditions that the petitioner: (a) shall co-operate with the remaining investigation; (b) 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. 11. Violation of any condition shall entail cancellation of pre-arrest bail. 12. The anticipatory bail application stands disposed of. Page No.# 4/4 13. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant