Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010220422025 2025:GAU-AS:14372 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2391/2025 DIAMOND BARUAH SON OF BIRENDRA BARUAH RESIDENT OF NO. 1, MAKUMPATHER MAKUM PATHAR NO. 1 PO MAKUM PATHAR DISTRICT- TINSUKIA, ASSAM MOBILE NO. 8638614701. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B D KONWAR SR. ADV., MS S JAIN,MS M ZOMUANPUII,MR J SINGH,MR H AGARWAL Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER Date : 28.10.2025 Heard Mr. B.D. Konwar, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. H. Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Baishya, learned Additional Page No.# 2/3 Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. By this petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the petitioners, namely, Diamond Baruah, has prayed for granting pre-arrest bail, apprehending arrest in connection with Margherita P.S. Case No. 101/2025 under Section 112 of BNS, 2023 r/w Section 13/14 of Assam Games and Betting Act, 1970. 3. The allegations in the FIR dated 18.08.2025 pertain to conducting a search upon getting information about going on of activities in the nature of double guti gambling game which is violative of the Act enacted by State of Assam to prevent and punish these activities. 4. The learned Senior counsel for the petitioner contends that the maximum punishment, however is three years imprisonment. During search, some persons were arrested and some materials were seized including tickets. The present petitioner not named in the FIR. 5. The learned prosecutor on the basis of the case diary submits that the petitioner has found to be main organizer of these activities which cause lot of financial ruin and domestic conflicts by involving various persons in such addictive activities. 6. I have gone through the bail objection submitted by the I/O in which I/O contended that about role of the present petitioner based on the investigation material collected and all the contentions and materials indicated in the bail objection on the basis of investigation prima facie indicate the present petitioner as the prime culprit in these activities. Therefore, I find force in the said contention of the prosecution as well as the I/O, it may not be prudent to grant Page No.# 3/3 anticipatory bail as investigation is still going on. Accordingly, the pre-arrest bail stands rejected at this stage and the petition disposed of accordingly. 7. Return the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant