Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010227532025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3326/2025 DHARMESWAR ROY S/O JAGAT DIPEN ROY PERMANENT RESIENT OF DHARAPUR CHARIALI, P.O. DHARAPUR, P.S. AZARA GUWAHATI-781014 DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM PRESENTLY RESIDING AT KAHILIPARA, UTTARAYAN VILLA, FLAT NO. B-B, TOWER NO. 5-B, GUWAHATI-781019, DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N J DUTTA, MR S.MITRA,MR. S MITRA,MR A K BORO,MR. T HUSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER 08.12.2025 Heard Mr. S. Mitra, learned counsel for the accused petitioner and Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 2. This petition under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the Page No.# 2/3 accused-petitioner, namely, Dharmeswar Roy, praying for grant of bail in connection with Hatigaon P.S. Case No.156/2025 corresponding to GR No. 4216/2025 under Sections 406/420/34 of the BNS Act. 3. Case diary as called for is received. 4. On 16.10.2025, the petitioner was granted interim bail primarily on medical ground to enable him to undergo surgery as projected at the time and the same was subsequently extended. In this case the accused petitioner was shown arrested on 08.10.2025. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that firstly, the FIR is of October, 2025 when BNS has already been in force and the case was registered under Section 406/420/34 IPC and secondly, as per the settled law, the offence of cheating and criminal breach of trust cannot go hand in hand. 6. The petitioner side has filed an additional affidavit seeking extension of interim bail on health ground and some documents have also been annexed which reveals that after completion of hernia surgery he was discharged and presently given conservative treatment. 7. Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that subsequently, the police has added Section 111(2) pertaining to organized crime. It is submitted that the applicable statutory period with regard to the added Section would be of 90 days. 8. It is further submitted by the learned prosecution that the petitioner has been found to be involved in as many as 11 cases in different districts of Assam where the modus operandi regarding the alleged offence is the same and he opposed in granting bail. 9. Section 111(2) BNS is reproduced herein below: Page No.# 3/3 ”Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) deals with severe punishments for organized crime, stipulating that if the crime results in death, the offender faces the death penalty or life imprisonment, plus a minimum fine of Rs. 10 lakhs; for other organized crimes, penalties are imprisonment (at least 5 years to life) and a minimum Rs. 5 lakh fine, making it a serious, non-bailable offense.” 10. Section 111(2) is punishable with imprisonment of minimum five years and which may extend to life imprisonment and the person will also be liable to imposed with fine of Rs.5,00,000/-. 11. I have perused the relevant portion of the case diary. 12. The IO has stated that the accused person is a habitual offender and multiple criminal cases registered against him between 2016 to 2025 the list of these cases has been enumerated. The investigation is stated to be in progress. 13. In the given facts and circumstances, I am of the considered view that it would not be in the interest of the continuing investigation to grant bail to the accused at this stage. 14. Accordingly, the interim bail granted to the accused vide order dated 16.10.2025 stands vacated and the instant bail petition is hereby rejected. 15. The petitioner shall surrender before the concerned learned court below within (seven) days, failing which the learned court below will be at liberty to issue NBWA. 16. Accordingly, this bail application stands rejected and disposed of. 17. Return the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant