Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010260872025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2786/2025 ABBAS ALI S/O- FAJAL HOQUE, VILL. NO.4 BHERA GAON, P.S. KALGACHIA, DIST. BARPETA, ASSAM A PRESENT RESIDENT OF VILL. BALABHITA, P.S. BARPETA ROAD, DIST. BARPETA, ASSAM VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, N.F. RAILWAY, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M I HUSSAIN, R KHA,N. UDDIN,MS. P AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : SC, C.G.C., MR. K K PARASAR (C.G.C) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR ORDER 08.12.2025 1. Heard Mr. M.I. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, learned CGC for the respondents. 2. This application has been filed under section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for granting pre-arrest bail to the petitioner namely, Abbas Ali, in connection with RPF/Post/BPRD’s Case No.07/2025, under Section 3(a) RP(UP) Act. Page No.# 2/3 3. The gist of the allegation as narrated in the case docket of Case No.07/2025 dated 30.10.2025 is that one ASI Har Kumar Pathak, Bongaigaon RPF/Post/BPRD, E.O. forwarded the case dockets in connection with Bongaigaon RPF/Post/BPRD’s Case No. 07/2025 under Section 3 (a) RP(UP) Act, alleging that he received an information regarding theft of TRD L-Bond at KM/No- 289/0-2 at BPRD yard Line No.7 and 9. After getting the information they went to the spot for enquiry and found few numbers of L- Bond in open condition without nut bolt and also few numbers missing. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner is a business man having multiple business establishments. He engaged the arrested accused person in his scrap metal shop to maintain and look into the same. The petitioner also submits that the arrested accused person has admitted that he has received the seized article in the absence of the petitioner and he has nothing to do with the recovery of the seized article from his scrap metal shop. 5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has submits that from the statements of the arrested accused person and other witnesses the involvement of the present petitioner is evident and as such he prays for rejection of the anticipatory bail application. 6. I have heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and examine the case records. I have also gone through the statement made by the arrested accused person wherein the arrested accused person has admitted that he maintains the godown cum scrap shop own by the petitioner and in the absence of the petitioner he received the alleged Page No.# 3/3 recovered materials. This Court after going through the materials brought before this Court and after hearing the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, it is of the considered opinion that the accused applicant can be allowed the privilege of pre-arrest bail. 7. Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest of the accused applicant named above, by the arresting authority, he shall be allowed to go on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.25,000/- with two surety of like nature to the satisfaction of the Investigating Authority in connection with RPF/Post/BPRD’s Case No.07/2025, under Section 3(a) RP(UP) Act, subject to the following conditions: i) That the petitioner shall appear before the concerned Investigating Officer within a period of 10(ten) days of passing of this order; ii) That the petitioner shall not hamper or temper with the evidence of the instant case in any manner; iii) That the petitioner shall fully cooperate with the investigation of the case by appearing before the I.O of the case, as and when call for by the I.O.; iv) That the petitioner shall not involved himself in such illegal business in future; and v) In view of the above aforesaid directions, the instant anticipatory bail application is disposed of as allowed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant