Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010254892025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2736/2025 CHITRA RANJAN BORAH S/O MANORANJAN BORAH, RO MELENG BORGURI, PS JORHAT, SUB JORHAT, DIST JORHAT, ASSAM, PIN 785006 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR D MEDHI, MR K THAKUR Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR ORDER Date : 16.12.2025 1. Heard Mr. D. Medhi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, appearing for the State respondent. 2. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023, has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Chitra Ranjan Borah, seeking pre-arrest bail, apprehending arrest in connection with Mariani P.S. Case No. 147/2025 under Sections 3(5)/ 318(4) of the BNS, 2023. Page No.# 2/2 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the only role of the present petitioner is that he introduced the informant to the other co- accused persons as he knew the persons concerned at that point of time and the co-accused was his tenant and the informant is known to the present petitioner for a long time. 4. In view of the submissions made, this Court has granted interim protection to the petitioner vide order dated 19.11.2025 to appear before the concerned I.O. and his statement may be recorded. 5. Mr. B. Sarma, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor has submitted that the up- to-date case diary has been received and from the contents of the case diary, it is appears that the vehicle involved in the present case has not yet been recovered, since the statements has been made that although the vehicle has been sold, no identity were retained from the buyers. 6. We have also perused the statement of the petitioner and other co- accused persons, recorded before the I.O. concerned. 7. Having gone through the statements recorded, we do not find it to be a fit case to continue the privilege of pre- arrest bail to the petitioner. 8. Accordingly, the interim pre-arrest bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated 19.11.2025 stands recalled. 9. The bail application stands dismissed. 10. Return the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant