Page No.# 1/4 GAHC040011532026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : AB/88/2026 Smti Priya Garodia Wife of Shri Praveen Garodia, resident of Flat No.5-D, 5th Floor, I Tech Plaza, Guwahati, SP Dispur, Kamrup (M) District, Assam. VERSUS The State of AP represented by the PP of AP Advocate for the Petitioner : Adam Tatak, B Das,A Chakraborty,K Pathak,Tanur Gao Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER Date : 29-07-2026 Heard Mr. K. Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. Loyi, learned PP for the State. 2. The petitioner is seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Banderdewa PS Case No. 32/2026 under section 112/316(5)/318(4)/319(2)/336(3)/ 341(1)/341(2). Page No.# 2/4 3. The case arose out of an elaborate complaint dated 05.06.2026, lodged by one Rajesh Agarwal who is stated to be a businessman and partner of M/s Premium Bonded Warehouse. 4. The gist of the allegations in a nutshell is that the accused person, Rishiraj Borkotoky, induced him to invest a considerable amount of money in some business activities and subsequently, the informant came to the opinion that he was defrauded. The amount in question is stated to be in excess of Rs. 30 crores. The present petitioner is named in the FIR. However, the most serious allegations is against the co-accused, Rishiraj Borkotoky. 5. Nevertheless, the informant has alleged that after the money came to be transferred to the account of Rishiraj Borkotoky, he along with the co-accused started transferring the money to various other accounts. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner through the online mode submits that though some money had come into her account, but the same had done so only in her capacity as a designer professional and that she is in no position to find out as to whether the money was legal or not. 7. The learned counsel draws attention to Annexure I which is a certificate issued by Chartered Accountant narrating the amounts which have come into the account of the petitioner's bank account in connection with her interior work contracts. Amounts have also come from the prime accused, Rishiraj Borkotoky. It is also stated in the certificate that the net service/contract income has been disclosed in the ITR and applicable income tax has also been paid. Page No.# 3/4 8. The scanned case diary has been received. 9. The learned Additional PP has drawn attention of this court to the report prepared by the IO regarding the case. He has also drawn attention to the endorsement in the case diary about receipt of an amount in excess of Rs. 62,00,000/- (rupees sixty two lakhs) in the account of the petitioner as part of the alleged money trail. It is submitted by the prosecution that it may not be prudent to grant the anticipatory bail to the petitioner at this stage. 10. I have considered the materials, the submissions of the learned counsels and carefully gone through the case diary. I have also perused the status report of investigation submitted by the IO. 11. The present petitioner is named in the FIR though the name mentioned is Ms. Priya Garo. In the status report of investigation submitted by the IO, it is stated that the allegations pertain to a well-planned financial fraud over a considerable period involving substantial amounts of money. It is stated that substantial financial investigation is in progress, during which electronic devices have been seized and is under examination. During investigation, it has been found that the main accused has transferred large amounts of money to various other beneficiaries and associates and that investigation into the money trail is in progress. 12. The petitioner herein claims that the money found to have come into her account is in connection with her professional work and that the same is accounted for money which has also been certified to by Chartered Accountants. Nevertheless, the investigation has stated about money trail to the accounts of the petitioner as well to the tune of more than Rs. Page No.# 4/4 62,00,000/- (rupees sixty two lakhs). The various dimensions of the different money trails found in the instant investigation are being looked into further. 13. Therefore, I am of the considered view that it would be prudent to keep the anticipatory bail petition pending at this stage. However, considering the limited materials against the petitioner so far, she would be deserving of an order of interim pre-arrest bail. 14. In such view of the matter, it is directed that that in the event of arrest of the petitioner in connection with this case, she shall be allowed to go on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand) with one surety to the satisfaction of the Arresting Authority, subject to conditions that:- (i) She shall fully cooperate with remaining investigation; (ii) She shall not hamper or tamper with the evidence; (iii) She shall abide by the law. 15. Violation of any of the bail conditions will entail cancellation of the bail. 16. List the matter after four weeks, i.e., on 27.08.2026. JUDGE Comparing Assistant