Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010181042025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1953/2025 MOHAMMAD KHAN S/O LATE ABDUL MANNAN R/O HOUSE NO. 90 VINAY NAGAR, CHIVTIHWA, BAIRAMPUR, UTTAR PRADESH, DIST. UTTAR PRADESH, PIN- 271206 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION (CBI). Advocate for the Petitioner : MR I RAFIQUE, N CHAKRABORTY,MS A AFREEN,MRS S A CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : SC, CBI, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 17.09.2025 1. Heard Mr. I. Rafique, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. M. Kumari, learned standing counsel for the CBI. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was granted interim bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 14.08.2025 and Page No.# 2/3 he has appeared before the Investigating Officer and has co-operated in the investigation and, therefore, he prays for making the interim bail absolute. 3. On the other hand, the learned standing counsel has opposed the making of the interim bail absolute on the ground that the petitioner is not co-operating in the investigation. She also submits that in spite of having the documents required by the Investigating Officer, he is denying to produce the same. In support of her submission, the learned standing counsel, CBI has produced the case diary which contains the endorsement of the Investigating Officer to that effect. 4. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides. 5. It appears that the petitioner has appeared before the Investigating Officer inpursuant to the directions of this Court and his statement has also been recorded. 6. Though, the learned standing counsel, CBI has submitted that the petitioner is not co-operating in the investigation and have not produced the documents sought for by the Investigating Officer. However, this Court is of considered opinion that the petitioner by appearing before the Investigating Officer in compliance to the directions of this Court had complied with the conditions of interim bail. 7. Merely for answering that the documents sought for by the Investigating Officer are not available with him, it cannot be regarded that he is not co-operating in the investigation. A person has even the right to remain silent in a criminal proceeding where accusation has been levelled against him. It is for the Investigating Agency to collect the evidence through other legal means under the provision of BNSS and BSA. Page No.# 3/3 8. So long as the petitioner appears before the Investigating Officer and answers the queries posed to him by the Investigating Officer, he may not be regarded as not complying the directions of this Court. The answers given to the Investigative Officer may not decide as to whether the petitioner is co-operating or not. 9. As the petitioner has complied with the directions of this Court, the interim bail granted to him by the order dated 14.08.2025 is hereby made absolute subject to the condition that he shall continue to appear before the Investigating Officer and co-operate in the investigation as and when so required by the Investigating Officer. 10. With the above observation, this anticipatory bail application is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant