Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010170502024 2025:GAU-AS:535 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2218/2024 MD AZIZUR RAHMAN S/O MD. SYEDUR RAHMAN R/O HOUSE NO. 137, VILL- KOWARPUR P.O. KALAKHOWA ADARSHA GAON P.S. NORTH LAKHIMPUR, SUB- DISTRICT NAOBAICHA, DIST. LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B CHOUDHURY, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER 20.01.2025 Heard Mr B Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner, Md Azizur Rahman, who has filed this application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023, with payer for pre-arrest bail, as he is apprehending arrest in connection with North Lakhimpur PS Case No. Page No.# 2/3 196/2024, corresponding to GR Case No. 521/2024, under Sections 61(2)/306/112(1) of the BNS, 2023. 2. Heard Mr K Baishya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. 3. The FIR unfolds that the accused No. 1 named in the FIR was entrusted to look after the informant’s godown, but the goods from the godown went missing. On 20.07.2024, at about 08:00 pm, several electronic goods were recovered and the complainant went with the investigating team to identify the stolen articles. The articles were recovered from the possession of Md Raju Ahmed, who has implicated that the accused No. 1, Anil Kumar Das was involved with the theft. 4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is the registered owner of a hardware and electronic goods shop. He has annexed his trade licence as Annexure-5 of the petition. 5. It is submitted that the forwarding report clearly reveals that all the goods were recovered from Md Raju Ahmed, but certain goods were recovered from the present petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner was not aware that these goods were stolen goods and he is not a dealer of stolen goods, but a registered shop owner. 6. I have scrutinized the Case Diary. 7. I have considered the submissions at the Bar with circumspection. 8. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the Case Diary reveals the nexus between the petitioner and the other accused named in the FIR. 9. I have considered the submission that the petitioner has appeared before the IO and Page No.# 3/3 he has cooperated with the investigation. 10. I have also considered the submission that the petitioner’s statement has been recorded. 11. The petitioner is willing to cooperate with the remaining part of the investigation. 12. Considering all aspects, the interim order dated 27.08.2024, is hereby made absolute, under the same terms and conditions. 13. Anticipatory Bail Application stands disposed of. 14. Send back the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant