Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010214522024 2025:GAU-AS:9425 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2733/2024 UKIL ALI S/O LATE MOHAMMAD ALI R/O ABHAYAPURI, WARD NO. 1, P.S. ABHAYAPURI DIST. BONGAIGAON, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S RANA, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER 23.07.2025 Heard Mr. S. Munir, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. N. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. This is an application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner in connection with Bongaigoan P. S. Case No. 296/2024, under Sections 61(2)(a) /336(3) /316(2) / 340(2)/316(4)342(1) of BNS. 3. The Case Diary has been received and I have perused the same. 4. Mr. Munir, learned counsel for the petitioner, has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he is no way connected with the alleged offence. It is stated that the petitioner deals with the registration of vehicles and, for that purpose, frequently visited the office of the District Transport Officer (DTO). However, he has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR; rather, it is suggested that the DTO may be involved in the said offence. 5. He further submitted that after obtaining interim pre-arrest bail on 21.10.2024, the petitioner has cooperated with the investigation of the case. He also submits that the petitioner is still ready and willing to cooperate with the Investigating Officer in the further course of the investigation, if the interim pre-arrest bail order is made absolute. 6. In this regard, Ms. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, has submitted that although the petitioner cooperated with the IO after obtaining interim pre-arrest bail and his statement was recorded, the IO has collected several incriminating materials against the petitioner during the course of investigation. It is also stated in the bail Page No.# 3/3 application that the petitioner has transferred and registered 5 (five) vehicles from Lakshadweep at the office of the DTO, Bongaigaon, and is allegedly involved in such offences. As the investigation is still ongoing, she submits that the petitioner should not be granted bail at this stage, as his release may lead to tampering with evidence or hampering the investigation. 7. In response, Mr. Munir, learned counsel for the petitioner, has submitted that the allegation regarding the registration and transfer of vehicles from Lakshadweep is false and can be verified from the records of the DTO office. He further submitted that the petitioner does not own five vehicles, as alleged in the report by the IO, and this too can be verified from the DTO office. Moreover, after obtaining interim bail, the petitioner has not violated any bail conditions and has cooperated fully with the IO whenever his presence was required. 8. After hearing the submissions of learned counsel for both sides and considering the materials available in the Case Diary, as well as the conduct of the accused/petitioner, I find it appropriate to allow the prayer made by the accused/petitioner. Accordingly, the interim pre-arrest bail granted to the accused/petitioner vide order dated 21.10.2024 is hereby made absolute, on the same terms and conditions 9. In terms of above, this anticipatory bail application stands disposed of. 10. The Case Diary be sent back. JUDGE Comparing Assistant