Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010194432025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2028/2025 AMARJYOTI MEDHI S/O MILAN MEDHI R/O VILL- HEKODANGABARI P.O. AND P.S. MIKIRBHETA DIST. MORIGAON ASSAM PIN-782106 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR A KHANIKAR Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER Date : 19.09.2025 Heard Mr. A. Khanikar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also earned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. D.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Page No.# 2/3 Prosecutor for the State. 2. By this petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the petitioner, namely, Amarjyoti Medhi, has prayed for granting pre-arrest bail, apprehending arrest in connection with Panbazar P.S. Case No. 259/2025 under Section 103(1)/118(2)/3(5) of BNS, 2023. 3. The case arose out of an FIR dated 08.08.2025 lodged by police official with allegation about finding an injured person who taken hospital and subsequently dead. It is also alleged that another injured person found in that area and he was also hospitalized. It is also alleged that in the early hours, these victims were assaulted by some shopkeepers of that area suspected them of theft. Nine persons have been named as accused/suspect including the present petitioner. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was called for questioning but he was not arrested. 5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the case diary and fairly submits there are direct adverse materials against the present petitioner. It is also submitted that the investigating officer has raised objection against the prayer of the petitioner. The investigation is not yet complete. 6. Perused the case diary. The investigation is not yet complete. The investigating officer has also submitted bail objection against the prayer for bail. It is further contended that grant of pre-arrest bail would hamper in investigation, there are stated to be materials indicating his involvement in the alleged offences. 7. Considering the nature of the alleged offence, the materials found so in Page No.# 3/3 the investigation and the contentions of the investigating officer – I am of the considered view that it may not be not a fit case to grant pre-arrest bail. 8. Accordingly, the pre-arrest bail stands rejected at this stage and the petition disposed of accordingly. 9. Return the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant