Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010181212025 2025:GAU-AS:11848 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2698/2025 SURAJIT DEY S/O SRI MUKUL DEY R/O BHABANIPUR, WARD NO. 9, P.S. SONARI, DIST. CHARAIDEO, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR G N SAHEWALLA, MS S AGARWAL,MR H K SARMA,MR M SAHEWALLA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER 02.09.2025 Heard Mr. G.N. Sahewalla, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D.P. Goswami, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. This is an application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking bail in respect of the accused/petitioner namely Sri Surajit Dey in connection with Sapekhati P.S. Case No. 21/2025 under Section 111(2), 113(2)(b), 113(3), 113(4), 147, 148, 149, 308(4) of the BNS, 2023 read with Section 10, 13, 16(1)(b), 17, 18A, 18B, 20, 39,40 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, read with Section 5 and 6 of the Explosives Substance Act. 3. The case of the petitioner is that on 26.06.2025, the Deputy Superintendent of Police(S), Charaideo lodged an Ejahar in respect of the Unlawful Activities present in the State of Assam and Nagaland before the Officer-in-Charge, Sapekhati Police Station, Charaideo. On receipt of the said information, the FIR was registered as Sapekhati P.S. Case No. 21/2025 under Section 111(2),113(2)(b), 113(3), 113(4), 147,148, 149, 308(4) of the BNS, 2023 read with Section 10,13,16(1) (b), 17,18A, 18B,20,39,40 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, read with Section 5 and 6 of the Explosives Substance Act. Thereafter, the Investigating Authorities arrested three number(s) of accused and forwarded them vide forwarding memo dated 27.06.2025. Page No.# 3/5 4. It is submitted that thereafter, the investigating authorities on 14.07.2025 came to the shop of the petitioner at Zangkham village in the district of Mon in the State of Nagaland and arrested the petitioner and handed over the Grounds of Arrest to the petitioner's wife. Subsequently, the petitioner was forwarded vide Forwarding Memo dated 14.07.2025, whereby and whereunder the only allegation against the petitioner is as hereunder: "5) As per the CDR report, the arrested accused person Sri Surajit Dey have been in contacted on 03.03.2024, through his mobile number i.e., 9678143163 to mobile number 9362364368 of Aden Konyak of NSCN(Angmai)" 5. It is submitted that perusal of the aforesaid reason would testify to the fact that the petitioner had contacted Aden Konyak only on 03.03.2024, who being a resident of the locality wherein the petitioner has his shop located, is a customer of the petitioner. He has acquaintance with Aden Konyak only as the petitioner's customer of the grocery shop but he has no knowledge that he has any connection with NSCN. The petitioner since 14.07.2025 has been languishing in Jail Custody. 6. It is further submitted that the petitioner had contacted the alleged NSCN cadre only on 03.03.2024 who being a resident of the locality wherein the petitioner has his shop, is a customer of the petitioner who has acquaintance with Aden Konyak only as a customer and he has no knowledge whether he has connection with NSCN. 7. The Investigating Officer has submitted a bail objection, wherein Page No.# 4/5 it is stated that it has been revealed that the accused has been found to maintain contact frequently with Aden Konyak of NSCN (Angmai), through their respective mobile phones. It is further stated in the bail objection that the accused person has provided information to the NSCN about potential target for extortion and to facilitate movement of extremist outfits in Assam-Arunachal Pradesh, and to collect contact numbers of resourceful persons of Charaideo District for the purpose of extortion. 8. It appears that the aforesaid assertations of the I.O are based on intelligence reports only, and since there is no such material available in the case diary, in support thereof, it appears that the only material available is some call detail records, but, from the same, the purpose of such calls obviously cannot be ascertained. 9. Having a telephonic conversation with some person is not an offence. It is the conversation itself which would determine whether the offence has been committed. Therefore, I am of the view that at present there is no material to connect the accused to any offence under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, which would attract Section 43D (5) thereof, and it would not be possible to hold that the charges against the accused are prima facie true. 10. As far as the other penal Sections under which the FIR has been registered are concerned, similar is the finding of this Court. Further, all the co-accused have been released on bail. 11. Considering the above, the prayer for bail is allowed. Page No.# 5/5 12. The accused abovenamed shall be released on bail of Rs. 50,000/- with 2 sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned District & Sessions Judge, Charaideo. Bail is granted on the condition that the accused shall regularly participate in the trial and shall not attempt to influence the witnesses. 13. Bail Application stands allowed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant