Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010177342025
2025:GAU-AS:11570
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2599/2025 SHUNTI DAS S/O- ROHILAL ROBI DAS.
R/O- LAHORIGHAT, P.O. AND P.S.- LAHORIGHAT, DIST.- MORIGAON, ASSAM,. PIN - 782127. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. T SOM, MS. B. DAS,MS. S. SUT,MS. U HAZARIKA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA
ORDER 28.08.2025
1. Heard Ms. T. Som, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam. 2. This application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Shunti Das who has been detained behind the bars
Page No.# 2/3 since 05.07.2025(for the last 52 days) in connection with CID P.S. Case No. 04/2025 under Sections 61(2)/318(4)/336(3)/340(2) of BNS, 2023. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 10.02.2025, one Bhaskar Jyoti Sarmah had lodged an FIR before the Additional Director General of Police, Criminal Investigation Department (CID), inter alia, alleging that certain miscreants are circulating a fake letter with forged signatures of the first informant to various divisions under the Water Resources Department. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was having business relationship with one Ranjan Pegu, who is also one of the co-accused in this case and it is he, who duped the petitioner and her relatives on assurance of giving Grade-IV work charge work jobs to them in the Water Resource Department. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been detained behind the bars for the last 52 days and all the offences involved in this case entails punishment not more than 7(seven) years and therefore, under Section 487 of BNSS, 2023 the maximum statutory period of detention in this case is 60(sixty) days only. Hence, she prays that the petitioner may be granted bail on the ground of period of detention undergone by him. 6. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the Case Diary of CID P.S. Case No. 04/2025 and has submitted that there are incriminating materials in the Case Diary against the petitioner and there are evidence to show that the petitioner collected money from other prospected candidates also and paid the same to the co-accused Ranjan Pegu. 7. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and have gone through the Case Diary of CID P.S. Case No. 04/2025. Page No.# 3/3 Though there are sufficient incriminating materials against the petitioner in the Case Diary.
However, considering the progress of the investigation, in respect of the accusation levelled against the present petitioner as well as the fact that the petitioner has already completed 52 days behind the bars, this Court is of the considered opinion that if the petitioner co-operates in the investigation, his further custodial detention may not be necessary for fair completion of the investigation in CID P.S. Case No. 04/2025. 8. In view of the discussions made in the foregoing paragraphs, the above-named petitioner is hereby allowed to go on bail of Rs. 30,000/-(Rupees Thirty Thousand only) with a suitable surety of like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M) with following conditions that:- (i) the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Police Officer as and when called for and shall co-operate with the investigation; and (ii) the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to the informant or to any other person who may be acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts before the Investigating Officer or to any Court. 9. Send back the Case Diary. 10. With the above observations, this bail application is accordingly
disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant