Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010198422025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2876/2025 KHANINDRA KALITA @ JYOTISH S/O LT. HARESWAR KALITA R/O 105, KAMARGAON, DIPILA CHOWKA PATHONGHAT, P.S. SIPAJHAR, DIST. DARRANG, ASSAM PIN-784144 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE LEARNED PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR N RAY, N N HUSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER 19.09.2025 Heard Mr. N. Ray, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This is an application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Page No.# 2/3 (BNSS), 2023 praying for grant of bail in connection with Mangaldai PS Case No. 146/2025 under Sections 147/148/149/61(2) of BNSS, 2023 read with Sections 10/13/18/18(B)/20 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (herein after referred to as UA(P) Act). 3. In the FIR of the present case dated 18.07.2025, it is alleged inter alia that members of the band organization ULFA(I) have been indulging in unlawful activities, such as, recruitment, extortion and attempts to destabilize the State. The present petitioner was previously arrested on 09.07.2025 on the basis of material unearthed by the Police. It is alleged in this case that the petitioner had acquaintance with one ULFA(I) cadre, James Asom. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been arrested merely on suspicion because of his arresting earlier in Sipajhar PS Case No. 14/2021. It is further submitted that 14 numbers of similarly placed co-accused persons in the present case have been released on bail by the learned Special Judge, Charaideo by Order dated 26.08.2025. 5. Per contra, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor has submitted reference to the Case Diary (CD) that there is material to show that the petitioner was linkman of the ULFA(I) and communicated with its leaders. In support of his aforesaid contentions, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor has also pointed out the statements of the co-accused which implicates the petitioner. 6. On perusal of the CD, it does appear that there are some materials against the petitioner but that is in the form of statement of co-accused which in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Tofan Singh Vs. State of Tamil Nadu reported in AIR 2020 SC 5592 cannot be taken into consideration. 7. In the absence of admissible incriminating material, as distinguished from mere secret information, I am unable to form the satisfaction that the charges against the petitioner are prima facie true and therefore, the rigours of Section 43D(5) of the UA(P) Act is not attracted. 8. For the aforesaid reasons, the prayer for bail is allowed. Page No.# 3/3 9. The petitioner shall be released on bail with a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of learned District & Sessions Judge, Mangaldai in connection with the aforesaid case. 10. It is further provided that the petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and shall not try to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence. 11. It is also provided that the petitioner shall not leave the district without prior permission of the learned District & Sessions Judge, Mangaldai. 12. The Bail Application stands allowed and disposed of accordingly. 13. Return the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant