Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010051212025 2025:GAU-AS:3608 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./750/2025 VIKASH KR THAKUR S/O UMESH KUMAR THAKUR R/O FATASIL AMBARI, P.S. FATASIL AMBARI, ASSAM PIN-781025 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. I H SAIKIA, MR. K KALITA,MR. B BORAH Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 27-03-2025 Heard Mr. I.H. Saikia, the learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. K.K. Das, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State respondent. Page No.# 2/3 2. This is an application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, with prayer for bail as the petitioner is behind bars since 07.02.2025 in connection with Gorchuk P.S. Case No. 42/2025 u/s 120(B)/381/408/411/420 of IPC, 1860. 3. Case Diary is not received as reported by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 4. Mr. Saikia submitted in this regard that the accused/petitioner was arrested in connection with the case on 07.02.2025 and since last 50 days he is in custody. Thus the Investigating Officer got sufficient time to interrogate the accused/petitioner in the present case. Mr. Saikai further submitted that the allegation against the present petitioner is that he stole some cement bags from the godown and subsequently the purchaser were also identified and they were already granted bail. Thus there is sufficient progress in the investigation, hence, further custodial interrogation may not be necessary for investigation of the case. 5. Mr. Das, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted in this regard that from the FIR itself it is seen that the cement bags were entrusted with the accused/petitioner who sold the cement bags worth rupees more than 12 lacs and thus a case of criminal breach is found against the petitioner. Accordingly, Mr. Das insisted to issue reminder to call for the Case Diary. 6. Hearing the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides and without going into the detail of the merit of the case, it is seen that the petitioner is behind the bars since last 50 days and thus the Investigating Officer got sufficient opportunity to interrogate the accused/petitioner and at the same time as from the submission made by learned counsel for the Page No.# 3/3 petitioner it is seen that a certified copy of the bail order of this Court dated 21.02.2025 passed by learned SDJM(S) No. 1, Kamrup (M), wherefrom it is seen that the purchaser of the cement is already being identified and granted bail. 7. So, without going detail on the merit of the case and only considering the length of detention already undergone by the accused/petitioner, I find that further custodial interrogation may not be necessary for further investigation of the case. Accordingly, I find it is a fit case to enlarge the accused/petitioner on bail. 8. Accordingly, the accused/petitioner be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) only with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned SDJM(S) No. 1, Kamrup (M). The accused/petitioner, namely Vikash Kumar Thakur, 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, threaten or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them 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 SDJM(S) No. 1, Kamrup (M) without prior permission. The Bail Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant