Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010194072025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2814/2025 ANAND RASIWASIA S/O SHYAM SUNDAR AGARWAL R/O KANYA PATHSALA LANE NEAR GS LOHIA GIRLS COLLEGE TINSUKIA PO AND PS TINSUKIA DIST TINSUKIA ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N HASAN, MR. A HASAN,MR. I K BURAGOHAIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 08.09.2025 1. Heard Mr. N. Hassan, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam. 2. This application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Anand Rasiwasia, who has been detained behind the bars since 12.06.2025 (for more than 89 days) in Page No.# 2/3 connection with Tinsukia Police Station Case No. 156/2020 under Sections 420/409 of Indian Penal Code. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 31.01.2020, one Monuj Chutia had lodged an FIR before the Officer-In-Charge of Tinsukia Police Station, interalia, alleging that the his land documents have been utilized by the Bank Manager of Oriental Bank of Commerce for sanctioning a loan in the name of M/S B.S. Trading. The loan was of Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs). It is further alleged in the FIR that the informant and the present petitioner were shown as guarantors in the said loan and loan account has become a non- performing Asset and proceeding under the SARFAESI Act has been initiated in respect of the landed property of the informant. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that before approaching this Court this time, the petitioner had earlier approached this court for bail also, and on that occasion, his bail for bail was rejected on 01.08.2025, in Bail Application No. 2190/2025. 5. He submits that this time, the petitioner has approached mainly on the grounds of period of detention under law. 6. He submits that for the offences involved in this case, the maximum period of detention under Section 487 of BNSS, 2023 for which the petitioner may be kept behind the bars is 90 days, and he has already completed 89 days and on that ground only, he seeks his bail. 7. On the other hand, the Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the case diary of the Tinsukia Police Station Case No. 156/2020, and has submitted that there are sufficient incriminating material against the petitioner in the case diary. However, he also submits that the case has been fairly progressed and the charge sheet has not yet been filed. Page No.# 3/3 8. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides. 9. Considering the fact that the investigation has fairly progressed, as well as the period of detention undergone by the petitioner, the petitioner is allowed to go on bail of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) with one surety of like amount who should be the resident of the State of Assam subject to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tinsukia with the following conditions: i. The petitioner shall co-operate in the investigation, ii. The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to the informant or to 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. 10. With the above observation, this bail application is accordingly, disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant