Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010025252026 2026:GAU-AS:3522 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/295/2026 JURI DAS KONWAR D/O SRI BINOY CH. DAS PERMANENT ADDRESS- GHAR ENCLAVE, JAYANAGR, SIXMILE, GUWAHATI, ASSAM, PIN-781022. PRESENT ADDRESS- PRABHA HERITAGE, TRIBENI PATH, SURAJ NAGAR, SIXMILE, GUWAHATI, ASSAM, PIN-781022 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B D KONWAR SR. ADV., MS S JAIN,MR J SINGH,MS M ZOMUANPUII,MRS J M KONWAR Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 10-03-2026 Page No.# 2/4 Heard Mr. B.D. Konwar, the learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. P. Doley, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of State respondent. 2. This is an application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 for granting pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, namely, Juri Das Konwar in connection with Palashbari P.S. Case No. 0001/2026 under Sections 61(2)/316(5)/318(4)/336(3)/ 340(2)/344 of BNS, 2023. 3. Case Diary received. Perused the same. 4. It is submitted by Mr. Konwar that after obtaining the order of interim pre- arrest bail, the petitioner has already appeared before the I/O, cooperated in the investigation and her statement is also recorded by the I/O. During investigation and during her cooperation it has come out that the loan account, which has been mentioned in the FIR is not related with the bank accounts under which she was charge-sheeted in her departmental proceeding. It is further stated that during her tenure, the loan applications were not verified by her and from the reliable source it is learnt that one of the co-accused Rafikul Islam who was working as a Service Manager also verified the loan applications working as a Field Officer. However, for the other loan applications, the present petitioner has faced a departmental proceeding and she is already demoted under the said proceeding. But, in the case of the present FIR, the loan accounts which were mentioned in the FIR is not related with her and during that relevant period of time she was not working as a Field Officer in the said Bank. He further submitted that at present she is working in a Branch Office at Nagaon and hence there is no access to any documents which are pending Page No.# 3/4 before the Mirza Branch. Accordingly, he submitted that the present petitioner is no way connected in the alleged offence and considering this aspect of the case, her bail application may be considered. However, she is ready and willing to extend her cooperation in further investigation of the case, if she is provided with the privilege of pre-arrest bail. 5. Mr. Borthakur, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted in this regard that after obtaining the order of interim pre-arrest bail, the petitioner appeared before the I/O and her statement is also recorded by the I/O. But, from the available materials in the case record it is seen that it is she who verified some of the loan accounts for some fictitious persons. However, it is submitted by Mr. Borthakur that all the documents were already collected by the Investigating Officer during investigation and the verification process is still going on. Mr. Borthakur accordingly raised objection and submitted that it may not be a fit case to extend the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the present petitioner. 6. Hearing the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides, I have also perused the case record and the Case Diary. It is a fact that the present petitioner is cooperating in the investigation. But, the investigation is still under process as to whether all the loan applications were verified by the present petitioner or not and there is no note from the I/O that during the relevant period of time, the present petitioner was not in the Branch and the documents were also not verified by her. But, it is seen from the Case Diary that most of the documents have already been seized by police during investigation which were supplied along with the loan applications. In the same time, it is also seen that the loan account number which has been mentioned in the FIR and the Page No.# 4/4 accounts number under which the departmental proceeding was initiated, does not tally with each other and thus it cannot be stated that she faced with the departmental proceeding for anomalies/irregularities in connection with the loan accounts, which has been mentioned in the FIR. 7. Considering all the aspects of the case and also considering the fact that the I/O has already collected most of the documents during investigation, I find that custodial interrogation may not be necessary at present, as the entire case is based on documentary evidence, this Court is of the opinion that order of interim pre-arrest bail granted to the petitioner on 11.02.2026 is hereby made absolute with same terms and conditions with a further direction to the petitioner to appear before the I/O within 10 days from the date of order and extend her cooperation in the investigation of this case. JUDGE Comparing Assistant