Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010040362025 2025:GAU-AS:5700 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/453/2025 BAMANG SEI W/O-BAMANG TADH, PROP. OF M/S B.S ENTERPRISE, R/O- RCC BUILDING, 1ST FLOOR, PATING VILLAGE ROAD, SNGRAM, UNDER NYOBIA CIRCLE, P.S- SNGRAM, DIST- KURUNG KUMEY, ARUNACHAL PRADESH-791118 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MS A GOGOI, MR G PHUKAN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 08.05.2025 Heard Mr. G. Phukan, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. R. J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. This is an application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of pre-arrest bail to the accused/petitioners, who are apprehending arrest in connection with Jonai P.S. Case No. 162/2021, under Sections 120(B)/420/468/471/406 of the Indian Penal Code. Case Diary has been received and I have perused the same. It is submitted by Mr. Phukan, learned counsel for the petitioner, that after obtaining the order of interim pre-arrest bail on 10.03.2025, the petitioner already appeared before the I.O., co-operated in the investigation of the case and submitted all the GST documents etc. before the Investigating Authority. He is still ready and willing to co-operate the I.O. in further investigation of this case if he is granted with the privilege of pre-arrest bail. Mr. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, submitted in this regard that the present petitioner is not the F.I.R. named accused person and the F.I.R. was basically filed against one Chibang Pal and from the note of the I.O., it is also seen that the charge-sheet has already been filed against the said accused Page No.# 3/3 Chibang Pal and investigation is still under process against other accused persons. However, the present petitioner has co-operated in the investigation after obtaining the order of interim pre-arrest bail. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels of both sides, materials available in the Case Diary as well as the conduct of the accused/petitioner, who has already appeared before the I.O. and co-operated in the investigation of the case, I find that the custodial interrogation of the present accused/ petitioner is not necessary in this case and hence, I find it a fit case to extend the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the accused/petitioner. Accordingly, the interim pre-arrest bail, granted to the accused/petitioner vide order dated 10.03.2025, is hereby made absolute in the same terms and conditions. The anticipatory bail application stands disposed of in terms above. The Case Diary be sent back. JUDGE Comparing Assistant