Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010269232025 2025:GAU-AS:17624 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2884/2025 MAMUN SHAH S/O ABDUL SALAM SHAH, R/O VILL. BOROBAGJHAPA, P.S. SUKCHAR, DIST. SOUTH SALMARA, MANKACHAR, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B CHOWDHURY, MR. R MAJUMDAR Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, M DAS (INFORMANT),MR. P MAHANTA(INFORMANT) BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 18-12-2025 Heard Mr. HRA Choudhury, the learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. R. Majumdar, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. R. Kaushik, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of State respondent and Mr. P. Mahanta, the learned counsel appearing for the Page No.# 2/5 respondent/informant. 2. This is an application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying for grant of pre-arrest bail to the accused/petitioner, who is apprehending arrest in connection with South Salmara P.S. Case No. 148/2025 corresponding to G.R. No. 345/2025 u/s 318(2)/326(3)/342 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. Case Diary has already been received. Perused the same. 4. The additional-affidavit filed by petitioner side as well as the reply filed by the respondent/informant is also tagged along with the case records. Perused the same. 5. It is submitted by Mr. Choudhury, the learned counsel for the petitioner that the present petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any such offence of forging or fabricating documents as alleged in the FIR. He was the elected Anchalik Panchayat Member and thereafter presently he is elected as President Anchalik Panchayat. The case was lodged against him by the informant on the ill advice of one Abdul Monnaf Sheikh who also offered his candidature for the post of President Anchalik Panchayat. The FIR has been lodged with some false and concocted allegation. As per the allegation brought in the FIR, the present petitioner had submitted forged and fabricated educational documents at the time of filing his nomination paper. But, through the additional-affidavit the present petitioner has filed all his educational documents which are legal and genuine. The petitioner also submitted an RTI application on 09.12.2025 seeking a copy of Original Tabulation Register showing the marks obtained by him in the said H.S. examination of 2020 and accordingly it was found that he has not committed any fraud or forgery. Mr. Choudhury, the learned senior Page No.# 3/5 counsel accordingly submitted that only with an ulterior motive the FIR has been lodged in connivance of said Abdul Mollah Sheikh after his defeat in the Panchayat Election. However, the petitioner is ready and willing to extend his cooperation in further investigation of the case, if he is provided with the privilege of pre-arrest bail. 6. Mr. Kaushik, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted in this regard that all the certificates issued are fake and fabricated. Further, the letter which was issued dated 09.07.2023 is also found to be fake and fabricated. More so, the issuing officer, namely, Kamal Gogoi who verified the documents is also seems to be fake certificate as he got retired before lodging of the FIR or before the question of verification arose. Thus, he submitted that he not only submitted the fake and fabricated documents at the time of filing the nomination paper but, the subsequent documents which were filed along with the verified letter and the certificates stated to be issued are also shown to be issued after verification are also fake and fabricated documents. 7. Mr. Mahanta, the learned counsel appearing for the informant submitted in this regard that as per the Panchayat Election rule, minimum HSLC passed is required to file the nomination paper and in view of this only he obtained some fake and fabricated documents which were filed along with the nomination papers and on the basis of those forged demounts he also got elected in the Panchayat Election. He further submitted that the letter which is annexed along with the additional-affidavit being No. EXB/39P/179/2020 dated 09.07.2020 is also found to be fake and fabricated as per the RTI report. Thus, filing some documents along with the additional-affidavit, the petitioner also tried to Page No.# 4/5 mislead the Court and on the documents which were relied by the petitioner filing their additional-affidavit are also false and fabricated documents. 8. Mr. Mahanta further submitted that the letter which was issued on 09.07.2020 shown to be issued by the Controller of Examination wherein it has been noted that “verified & found correct” is also a fake document as the Assam Higher Secondary Education Council (AHSEC) was merged with SEBA in the month of September, 2024 resulting in the formation of Assam State School Education Board (ASSEB) and thus the signature of the Controller of Examination attached along with the note “verified & correct” is also found to be fake and fabricated document. The question of verification of document came only after the Pancghayat Election held in the month of May, 2025. Thus, there cannot be any question of verification of documents by the Controller of Examination in the year 2020. Thus, the verification report submitted by the petitioner along with the additional-affidavit is also fake and fabricated documents and on the basis of those fake and fabricated documents the petitioner got elected in the recent Panchayat Election. Accordingly, Mr. Mahanta also raised vehement objection and submitted that it is not at all a fit case to extend the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the present petitioner at this stage. 9. After hearing the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides, I have also perused the petition and annexure filed with the petition as well as the Case Diary. On perusal of the Case Diary it is seen that the I/O has collected sufficient incriminating materials against the present petitioner during investigation and it is also seen that this is an organized criminal activity wherein some other person may also involve in providing some fake certificates Page No.# 5/5 and documents to the present accused/petitioner. Further, it is seen that the case is still at the stage of investigation and many documents are yet to be verified by the Investigating Officer. Further, considering the nature and gravity of the offence I find that custodial interrogation may be required to unearth some more facts involved in this case, and as an organized crime some other persons may also involve. So considering all these aspects of the case, vis-à-vis the gravity of the offence, I find that custodial interrogation may be necessary for the purpose of investigation. 10. In view of this this anticipatory bail application stands rejected. Case Diary be returned back. JUDGE Comparing Assistant