Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010185332025 2025:GAU-AS:14600 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1987/2025 BAJRANG BOTHRA AND 6 ORS S/O P C BOTHRA, 2: LAXMI PAT BOTHRA S/O P C BOTHRA 3: SANJAY SINGHANIA S/O DEEN DAYAL SINGHANIA 4: AJAY SINGHANIA S/O DEEN DAYAL SINGHANIA 5: NIKHIL BOTHRA S/O LAXMI PAT BOTHRA 6: SUNIL KUMAR SINGH S/O CHARAN SINGH 7: ROSHAN YADAV S/O RAJENDRA SINGH ALL THE PETITIONERS ARE C/O EPACK PREFAB TECHNOLOGIES LTD. B 13 AND 14 ECOTECH 1ST EXT GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR GREATER NOIDA UTTAR PRADESH 20130 VERSUS Page No.# 2/3 THE STATE OF ASSAM, REPRESENTED BY PP, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A M BORA, MR. M S HUSSAIN,MR. V A CHOWDHURY,MS. C CHOUDHURY,MR. D K BAIDYA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS O R D E R 30.10.2025 Heard Mr. A. M. Bora, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. D. K. Baidya, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, for the State respondent. 2. This is an application under Section 482 BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of pre- arrest bail to the accused/petitioners, who are apprehending arrest in connection with Khetri P.S. Case No. 33/2025 under Sections 316(2)/318(4)/125/296/ 351(3)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023. 3. It is submitted by Mr. Bora, learned Senior Counsel that from the FIR itself, it is seen that there is a commercial dispute between two companies and from the statement made in the FIR it also reveals that they have already completed the work order and 2-3 work orders have already been placed by the company of the petitioners. 4. It is further submitted that when the petitioners company prayed for Page No.# 3/3 completion certificate, then only the dispute arose and there was an allegation with regard to the quality of the work and other aspects of the case, but there is no materials to fulfil the ingredients of cheating and the dispute arose only after completion of the work. 5. All the seven petitioners were granted interim pre-arrest bail vide order dated 19.08.2025. However, though two of the petitioners being 6 and 7 have appeared but in the meantime, based on the criminal petition preferred by the petitioners seeking quashing of the investigation, further proceeding/investigation has been stayed vide order dated 14.10.2025 in Crl. Pet. No.1249/2025. 6. The case diary has been received and placed before the Court. 7. The learned Addl. P.P. has confirmed that the statements of the petitioner nos. 1 to 5 have not been recorded in the case. 8. In view of the subsequent development, I do not deem it necessary to keep the bail petition pending. Accordingly, the bail petition granted in favour of the petitioners vide order dated 19.08.2025 is hereby made absolute, subject to the conditions that:- (i) they will co-operate with the process of law. (ii) Co-operate with the investigation. 9. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant