Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010225942025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2420/2025 SIDDIK BORAH S/O LT DHAN BORAH R/O VILLAGE DEBERAPAR, P.O. GOHAINBARI, P.S. MARIANI, DISTRICT JORHAT 785635 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S R A NASER, S K SARFRAJ KARIM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER Date : 30.10.2025 Heard Mr. S. R. A. Naser, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. M. P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the State. 2. The present application has been instituted praying for pre arrest bail for the accused petitioner, namely Siddik Borah, in connection with Mariani Police Station Case No.89/2025, under Section 303(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. This Court vide order dated 13.10.2025, had considering the contentions raised by the accused petitioner in the present application extended in the interim, the liberty of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner and required him to appear before the Investigating Officer and have his statement recorded on or before 24.10.2025. 4. The Case Diary has been perused and it is found that the accused petitioner had appeared before the Investigating Officer and his statement was recorded on 17.10.2025. The materials appearing in the Case Diary does not disclose that the petitioner has misused his liberty of interim pre-arrest bail as extended to him by this Court vide order dated 13.10.2025. The materials in the Case Diary further reveals the petitioner to be involved in the theft of cattle and accordingly Mr. M. P. Goswami, learned Page No.# 3/4 Additional Public Prosecutor, submits that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner would be mandated in the matter. 5. I have perused the contents in the Case Diary as well as heard the learned counsel for the parties. 6. On a due consideration of the materials coming on record as well as the disclosures made in the Case Diary, this Court is of the considered view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner at this stage would not be called for. The petitioner not having misused the liberty of interim pre-arrest bail as extended to him vide order dated 13.10.2025, and his statement having also in record, this Court is of the considered view that the interim bail as granted to the petitioner vide order dated 13.10.2025, be made absolute, subject to the following conditions ; (i) the accused petitioner, herein, shall appear before the Investigating Officer at an interval of 15 (fifteen) days from today. The accused petitioner shall also appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for, for the purpose of investigation of the matter. (ii) the accused petitioner, herein, shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade them from disclosing the facts to the Investigating Officer of the case; (iii) the accused petitioner, herein, shall not Page No.# 4/4 indulge in commission of offence similar in nature to the one alleged against him in Mariani P.S. Case No.89/2025 ; (iv) the accused/petitioner, herein, shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jorhat, without prior permission. 7. Any violation of the conditions set out in the present order would result in cancellation of the pre-arrest bail as granted to the petitioner by this Court vide the present order. 8. With the above observations and directions, the present Anticipatory Bail Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant