Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 26577 (GAU)

GOKUL SARMA AND ANR v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

AB/2983/2025 · 2025-12-17

Anjan Moni Kalita

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010278652025 2025:GAU-AS:17605 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2983/2025 GOKUL SARMA AND ANR S/O BHAGABAN SARMA, R/O WARD NO 12, NALBARI TOWN, PO AND PS NALBARI, DIST NALBARI, ASSAM, PIN 781335 2: ASHIM BHAGABATI S/O SUBASH BHAGABATI R/O BHUPENDRA NGAR NO 2 MATHGARIA NARENGI PO NARENGI GUWAHATI P.S. NOONMATI DIST KAMRUP (M) ASSAM PIN 78102 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M K HUSSAIN, MR. M ALOM,MS. F H AHMED,MRS. S Y AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER Page No.# 2/3 18.12.2025 Heard Mr. M. Alom, learned counsel appearing for the accused/applicants. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Addl. P.P., Assam appearing for the State. This is an application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for pre-arrest bail to the accused/applicants in connection with Nalbari P.S. Case No.338/2025 registered under Sections 61(2)/316(2)/318(4)/336(3)/340(2) of the BNS, 2023. The gist of the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. dated 03.12.2025 is that the accused/applicants have been issuing fake certificates of an institution, namely, North-East Council for Allied Health Sciences at Santipur, Nalbari Town. It was alleged that the informants after receipt of the aforesaid fake certificates on payment of certain fees, as provided in the F.I.R., applied for various paramedical jobs in hospitals. However, the hospital authorities informed them that the certificates were, in fact, fake certificates. On receipt of the F.I.R., the police registered the Nalbari P.S. Case No.338/2025 under the aforementioned sections. Taking into account the allegations in the F.I.R. as well as after hearing the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the respective parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is not a fit case to grant the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the accused/applicants Page No.# 3/3 at this stage. The prayer for anticipatory bail to the accused/applicants is hereby rejected. The Anticipatory Bail Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant