Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010229212024 2025:GAU-AS:900 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2929/2024 SAFIKUL SAIKIA S/O MANIR SAIKIA R/O VILL- UDIYANA P.S. RANIGA PIN-781354 DIST. KAMRUP, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A PAUL, MD. M. ALI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER Date : 28.01.2025 Heard Mr. A. Paul, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. M.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. Apprehending arrest in connection with Sonapur P.S. Case No. 187/2024, Page No.# 2/3 under Section 303(2) of the BNS, this application under Section 482, BNSS is preferred by applicant, namely, Safikul Saikia, for grant of pre-arrest bail. 3. The aforementioned case has been registered on the basis of one FIR lodged by one Krishna Pegu, Site In-charge, Shivam Trancon on 11.09.2024. The essence of allegation in the FIR dated 11.09.2024, is that as many as seventeen persons, namely, Md. Rahidul Ali, Md. Jaharuddin, Md. Akesh Ali, Md. Manod Ali, Md. Khalil Ali, Md. Mubul Hussain, Md. Anwar Hussain, Md. Hanif Ali, Md. Jakir Hussain, Md. Jeherul Islam, Md. Zahar Ali, Md. Abdul Salam, Md. Shah Alom, Md. Jeherul Islam, Md. Sadeb Ali, Md. Hyder Ali and Md. Sayed Uddin, on 11.09.2024, at about 5 a.m. in the morning, attempted to load 250 mm iron pipes of 20 feet length in a truck, bearing Registration No. AS-25-BC-4036, without permission of the company. 4. Mr. Paul, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the name of the applicant finds no mention in the FIR dated 11.09.2024, and that the applicant had been granted the privilege of interim pre-arrest bail, vide order dated 22.11.2024, and pursuant to the said order, he has also appeared before the I.O. and cooperating with the investigating agency, and that all the accused named in the FIR are granted the privilege of pre-arrest bail, and therefore, it is contended to make the interim order 22.11.2024, absolute in the same terms and conditions. 5. On the other hand, Mr. Goswami, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the case diary before this Court and submits that the applicant has appeared before the I.O. and cooperating with the investigating agency. Mr. Goswami further submits that some witnesses have been examined and the stolen articles have been recovered and seized, but some of the accused are yet to be arrested, and under such circumstances, Mr. Goswami has opposed this Page No.# 3/3 application. 6. Having heard the submission of learned Advocates of both sides, I have gone through the application and the documents placed on record and also perused the case diary with the assistance of Mr. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 7. It appears that the applicant was granted the privilege of interim pre-arrest bail by this Court, vide order dated 22.11.2024 and pursuant to the said order, the applicant has appeared before the I.O. and cooperating with the investigating agency. Further, it appears from the case diary that the I.O. has achieved some progress in the investigation of this case and the stolen articles have already been recovered and seized and some witnesses have also been examined. In that view of the matter, custodial interrogation of the applicant, in the interest of investigation, seems to be not warranted here in this case. 8. Accordingly, the interim order dated 22.11.2024, is hereby made absolute in the same terms and conditions. 9. In terms of above, this application stands disposed of. 10. Case diary be returned. JUDGE Comparing Assistant