Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010176772025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2631/2025 SRI LAKHESWAR DAS S/O LATE HARICHARAN DAS, R/O VILL- BONGAON, P.S. BARAMA, DIST. BAKSA, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R GOSWAMI, MS N DEVI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER 20.08.2025 1. Heard Mr. R. Goswami, learned counsel for the accused petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. P. Goswami, learned Addl. P.P., Assam appearing. 2. This petition under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the accused- petitioner, namely, Lakheswar Das, has prayed for grant of bail in connection with Nalbari PS Case No.223/2025 under Sections 61(2)/336(3)/340(2) of BNS 2023. Page No.# 2/3 3. The case arose out of an ejahar dated 16.07.2025, lodged by learned DFO, Chirang Division, Kajalgaon with the allegation that some people had come to the said office to join with fake appointment letters and the said letters were detained and during preliminary enquiry, it came to be known that one racket is behind these activities. One person by the name, Sushanka Das of Nalbari has been named in the ejahar. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the meantime, there must have been significant progress in the investigation. The documentary evidence has been seized. The petitioner has also been in custody since 21.07.2025. 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner shall cooperate in the remaining investigation and in event of being charge-sheeted shall face trial but prays that he may be enlarged on bail at this stage. 6. Case diary has been received. 7. Mr. D. P. Goswami, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, submits that investigation has revealed incriminating materials lending strong support to the basic allegation in the ejahar about involvement of a racket of fake appointment letters and cheating people by assuring them of such employment in the Forest Department and taking money from them to the tune of Rs.50,000/- each. It is also submitted that the investigation has also revealed implicating materials against the present accused who is stated to have worked in collusion with co-accused and had conducted this activity of fake appointment letters. 8. Accordingly, in the given facts and circumstances, I do not deem it fit Page No.# 3/3 to grant bail of the accused at this stage and the bail petition stands rejected. 9. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail stands disposed of. 10. Return the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant