Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010001152025 2025:GAU-AS:519 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./41/2025 PRADIP SHARMA S/O LATE NARAYAN SHARMA PRESENT ADDRESS- H/NO. 41, JAYANTA NAGAR, B/L -09, P.S. NOONMATI, DIST. KAMRUP (M), PERMANENT ADD- NEAR JOYGURU MANDIR, DUDHNOI, DIST. KAMRUP (R), ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P K SAHARIA, MS K DAS Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER 20.01.2025 Heard Mr. P. K. Saharia, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. This is an application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying for grant of bail to the accused/petitioner, who has been languishing in jail hazot since 28.11.2024 in connection with Paltanbazar P.S. Case No. 424/2024, registered under Section 309 (4) of BNS. The Case Diary has been received and I have perused the same. It is submitted by Mr. Saharia, learned counsel for the petitioner, that the present petitioner is innocent and he is not at all involved in the alleged offence. He further submitted that the petitioner is 65 years old and has been in custody since 28.11.2024. Given the length of his detention, he prays for his release on bail. It is submitted that the petitioner is a permanent resident of the addressed locality, and there is no chance of absconding, if he is enlarged on bail. In addition to, he submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the Investigating Officer (I.O) in the further investigation of the case, if granted bail. In this context, Mr. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, has submitted that there is sufficient material available in the case diary against the accused/petitioner. Two other co-accuseds are also involved in the alleged offence, one of whom has already been arrested, while the other is yet to be apprehended. He further submitted that the investigation is ongoing, and to date, the golden ring, which was allegedly sold by the petitioner along with the other co-accused, has not been recovered. Therefore, at this stage, he raised an objection to granting bail to the Page No.# 3/4 accused/petitioner. Hearing the submissions made by the learned counsels for both sides and the materials available in the case diary, it is evident that the I.O has collected sufficient materials against the accused/petitioner. However, it appears unlikely that the charge- sheet will be submitted within the next 5 to 6 days, as the investigation is still ongoing. Without delving into the merits of the case and solely considering the length of detention already undergone by the accused/petitioner (i.e., 54 days), I am of the view that the IO got an opportunity to interrogate the accused/petitioner while keeping him in custody. Consequently, further custodial interrogation does not appear necessary in this case. Accordingly, it is provided that on furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) only with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M), Guwahati, the accused/petitioner, namely Pradip Sharma, be enlarged on bail, subject to the following conditions: (i) that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required; (ii) that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and (iii) that the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M), Guwahati, without prior permission. Page No.# 4/4 In terms of above, this bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant