Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010191912025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2817/2025 NIKUMONI RAJBONGSHI SON OF NARAYAN RAJBONGSHI RESIDENT OF VILL- KUWARI GAON P.O. GANESH KUWARI P.S. SIPAJHAR DIST. DARRANG, ASSAM PIN-784145. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R P HAZARIKA, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. D GOGOI, SPECIAL PP, WILDLIFE BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 15.09.2025 1. Heard Mr. F. Haque, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Special Public Prosecutor for the Wildlife. 2. The application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Nikumoni Rajbongshi, who has been detained behind the bars since Page No.# 2/3 07.08.2025 (for last 39 days) in connection with Offence Report No. KR/03 of 2025- 2026 dated 07.08.2025 under Sections 24/25/40/41 of the Assam Forest Regulation, 1891. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 07.08.2025, the Range Forest Officer, Kurua Range Forest, Bahgara had found 4 numbers of Teak Stumps indicating recent felling of Teak Trees and in order to find out miscreants involved in the act of felling of teak trees, a search was conducted. During search operation, it was found that the petitioner along with some other person were found involved in the act of felling of Teak Trees and accordingly, the petitioner was arrested on 07.08.2025. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is in no way involved in the offence alleged against him. He further submits that the petitioner is languishing behind the bars for last 39 days and considering the period of detention already undergone is sufficient for the purpose of investigation. 5. The learned Special Public Prosecutor has also submitted that the investigation has fairly progressed and considering the length of detention, he does not have anything to say regarding the prayer for bail made by the petitioner. 6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides as well as progress in the investigation as well as the period of detention already undergone by the petitioner, this Court is of considered opinion that if the petitioner co-operates in the investigation, his further custodial interrogation may not be necessary for the fair completion of the investigation. 7. In view of above, the above named petitioner is allowed to go on bail of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) with one surety of like amount subject to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Darrang, Mangaldai with following conditions:- Page No.# 3/3 (i) That the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person who may be acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts of the case before the Investigating Officer; (ii) That the petitioner shall co-operate in the investigation. 8. This bail application is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant