Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010006242025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/146/2025 ANOWAR HUSSAIN SON OF ABDUL MATLEB, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE TANGAON PART-III P.O. - DHANUA, P.S.- MANKACHAR, DISTRICT - SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM, PIN - 783127 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM, REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S RAHMAN, MR. S U AHMED,MR. K H SAIKIA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER 06.02.2025 Heard Mr. S. Rahman, learned counsel for the accused and also heard Mr. M.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam, appearing for the State respondent. Page No.# 2/3 2. Apprehending arrest in connection with Mankachar P.S. Case No.221/2024 under Section 111/61(2)/288 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, read with Section 4/5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908, this application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, is preferred by the applicant, namely, Anowar Hussain, for grant of pre-arrest bail. 3. It is to be noted here that the aforementioned case has been registered on the basis of one FIR lodged by S.I. Bikash Saikia of Kalapani Out Post on 15.12.2024. The allegation in the FIR dated 15.12.2024 is that acting on a tip off, the informant and other police staff conducted search in the house of one Rukia Khatun and recovered (i) explosive sticks total 38 nos. of packets each containing 20 nos. of sticks, with total 760 nos. of sticks, written as 'Neo Gel' on each stick, (ii) explosive wire 55 bundles, colour blue, (iii) total 4 nos. box of CDET ALFA ordinary detonator, each box containing 100 nos. of detonator, total 400 nos. of detonator, (iv) instantaneous electric detonator strength no-08, total 5 bundles, (v) two bundles of read coloured electric wire, (vi) total 6 packets of white cement, each packet weighing 1 kg and (vii) one yellow colour scissor and seized the same in presence of witnesses and the same were kept in the house of Rukia Khatun by one Izazul Miah of Borobilla village. 4. Mr. Rahman, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and no way involved with the offence alleged in the FIR and his name is also not there in the FIR and nothing has been recovered from his possession and that he is ready to cooperate with the investigating agency and therefore, it is contended to allow the petition. 5. On the other hand, Mr. M.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam, has produced the case diary before this Court and submits that during the course of investigation the I.O. has arrested one Akramuz Zaman and that person has disclosed the name of the present applicant as supplier of the same and as such, custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary in the interest of investigation and therefore, Mr. Goswami has opposed the petition. 6. Having heard the submission of learned Advocates of both the parties, I have Page No.# 3/3 carefully gone through the petitioner and the documents placed on record and also perused the case diary with the assistance of Mr. Goswami, learned Additional P.P. 7. It appears that the I.O. has collected sufficient incriminating materials against the present applicant and the investigation is going on and at this stage, it cannot be said that custodial interrogation of the present applicant is not required in the interest of investigation. His custodial interrogation appears to be indispensable in the interest of investigation as the allegations are serious in nature and accordingly, this application stands dismissed. The applicant is directed to appear before the I.O. within one week from today. 8. Case diary be returned. Comparing Assistant Sd/- Robin Phukan JUDGE