Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 11305 (GAU)

SRI KARUNA TALUKDAR v. STATE OF ASSAM

AB/1008/2026 · 2026-07-27

Shamima Jahan

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010092012026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1008/2026 SRI KARUNA TALUKDAR W/O LATE SRIDHAR TALUKDAR R/O H.NO.106 HENGRABARI, FOREST GATE, P.O.- HENGRABARI P.S.-DISPUR DISTRICT-KAMRUP METRO, ASSAM PIN-781036 VERSUS STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR D KALITA, MS R KOUR Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 28.07.2026 Heard Ms. R. Kour, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. By this petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the petitioner, namely, Karuna Talukdar, has prayed for granting pre-arrest bail in connection with Dispur P.S. Case No. 91/2026, registered under Section 420/406 of BNS, 2023. Page No.# 2/2 3. The FIR on the basis of which the petitioner was arrayed as an accused person was lodged on 4-2-2026, wherein it was stated that the petitioner had taken an amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- from the informant with the promise to give an employment to her son in AIMS Hospital, Chansari. 4. The informant further stated that neither the petitioner had given any employment to her son nor had returned the money back and on communication been made the petitioner used to defer the payment on one ground or the other. The said petitioner was enlarged on interim pre- arrest bail by order dated 18-05-2026 with one of the condition that he should appear before the Investigating Officer within a period of 7 days. 5. Mr. B. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that pursuant to the said direction the petitioner had appeared before the IO and his statement was recorded. 6. As such it is seen that the petitioner is cooperating with the investigation and it is also seen in the FIR that the petitioner did not deny the payment of the said amount of money to the informant, this Court deems it fit to make the order dated 18-05-2026 by which interim bail was granted to the petitioner to be made absolute. 7. Accordingly, the order dated 18-05-2026 is made absolute and the petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant