Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010200992025 2025:GAU-AS:12138 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2181/2025 HEMANTA BHATTACHARYA SON OF SRI JIBAN CHANDRA BHATTACHARJEE, R/O NARAYANPUR, BEDULAHATI, P.O. DIKRONG, LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM- 784164. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR KARNATAKA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P MAHANTA, MS. M BORGOHAIN,M DAS Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 05.09.2025 1. Heard Mr. P. Mahanta, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam. Page No.# 2/4 2. This application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Sri Hemanta Bhattacharya, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Vijayapura Police Station Crime No. 0047/2025 under Sections 66(D)/66(C) of the Information Technology Act, 2008 as well as under Section 318(4) of the BNS, 2023. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is the resident of Narayanpur in the district of Lakhimpur. However, he had received a notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS, 2023 from Cyber Economic & Narcotics (CEN) Crime Police Station, Vijayapur in the State of Karnataka, whereby he was asked to appear before the Investigating Officer of Crime No. 0047/2025 within 7(seven) days from the date of receipt of the notice. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner had received the aforesaid notice in the month of August, 2025. However, he submits that the time of the 7(seven) days granted in the said notice has lapsed and therefore, the petitioner now apprehends that if he approach the Investigating Officer of the aforesaid case now, he may be apprehended in the said case. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the petitioner as the aforesaid case is pending in a Police Station in the State of Karnataka, he needs some time to approach the jurisdictional Court to seek necessary relief in the aforementioned case. 6. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Page No.# 3/4 raised no objection to the grant of limited protection to the petitioner in terms of the guidelines of the Apex Court in the case of “Priya Indoria Vs. State of Karnataka and Ors.” reported in “(2024) 4 SCC 749.” 7. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and after perusal of the materials on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that since the time mentioned in the notice under Section 35(3) received by the petitioner has lapsed, the apprehends of the petitioner of getting arrested in connection with the aforesaid case, appears to be genuine. 8. Since the aforesaid case is pending in a Police Station in the State of Karnataka, this is a fit case where limited transit bail may be granted to the petitioner in terms of the guidelines of the Apex Court in the case of “Priya Indoria Vs. State of Karnataka and Ors.” (supra). 9. In view of the above, this Court is of the considered opinion that the above-named petitioner is granted interim transit bail till 25th September, 2025, to enable him to approach the jurisdictional Court to seek appropriate relief. 10. For the reasons aforesaid, if before the said period, the petitioner is arrested in connection with the above-mentioned case, he shall be allowed to go on interim bail of Rs. 30,000/-(Rupees Thirty Thousand) with a suitable surety of like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the arresting authority with following conditions:- (i) the petitioner shall appear and co-operate in the investigation; and (ii) the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, Page No.# 4/4 threat or promise to the informant or to any 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. 11. It is hereby made clear that the relief granted in this case is interim in nature and will remain effective only till 25th September, 2025. 12. This anticipatory bail application is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant