Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010064012025 2025:GAU-AS:3980 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/711/2025 MOHAMMAD ALI ZULFIKAR LASKAR S/O- RAYAB ALI LASKAR R/O VILL- RAJESWARPUR PART-VI, P.O. KATAGAON, P.S. LALA DIST. HAILAKANDI, ASSAM, PIN-788168 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE LEARNED PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S B LASKAR, A. H. AHMED,MS D DUTTA,MR. H A LASKAR,MR. A S TAPADER Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR M HUSSAIN(INFORMANT),MR. S R BARBHUIYA(INFORMANT),MR. A K AZAD (INFORMANT),MR. N HAQUE(INFORMANT) Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER 03.04.2025 Heard learned counsel Mr. A. S. Tapader, for the petitioner Mohammad Ali Zulfikar Laskar who has filed this application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 with prayer for pre-arrest bail as he is apprehending arrest in connection with Lala Police Station Case No.03/2025 under Sections 318(4)/316(2)/196 of the BNS, 2023. 2. Heard Mr. K .K Parashar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent State. 3. The allegation against the petitioner is that he has been illegally appointed as the Secretary of Rajyeswarpur Co-operative Society Ltd, Hailakandi. The petitioner was in collusion with the chairman Foyjul Haque Mazumdar who has fixed his monthly remuneration of Rs. 15,000/-. It is further submitted that the petitioner had to pay more than Rs. 11/12 lakhs for the illegal resolution adopted by the Board of Directors. 4. It is submitted that grave allegations are made against the petitioner and no case under section 318(4) of the IPC is made out against the petitioner. 5. Heard Mr. A. K. Azad, learned counsel for the informant who has submitted that the learned Sessions Judge vide order dated 20.03.2025 in connection with Crl. Misc. (B) Case No. 14/2025 has rejected the petitioner’s earlier prayer for pre-arrest bail by observing that the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the petitioner has acted in connivance with the other accused persons. It is further alleged that the present petitioner has also taken away the official documents. Page No.# 3/3 6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has also raised serious objection stating that the petitioner had earlier appeared before the I.O and there appears to be no apprehension of arrest as his statement has already been recorded. 7. I have also scrutinized the case-diary. The petitioner has indeed appeared before the I.O and his statement has been recorded. But the petitioner is apprehending arrest as the police has summoned the petitioner to the police station in connection with this case. Investigation has also progressed substantially. The petitioner is willing to co-operate with the remaining part of investigation. It appears that custodial interrogation may not be required. 8. Considering all aspects, petition is allowed. In the event of his arrest the petitioner shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 30,000/- with a suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority under the conditions that: (i) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 1 (one) week and co-operate with the investigation, and (ii) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every fortnight till completion of investigation. 9. On breach of any of the bail conditions, bail order shall automatically stand cancelled. 10. Send back the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant