Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010130552026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1425/2026 MANJIL HAQUE BHUYAN S/O- ABDUL RASHID BHUYAN, R/O- BAMUNIGAONPART, P.S.- JAKHALABANDHA, DIST- NAGAON, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM . REPRESENTED BY P.P. ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S M ABDULLAH P, MR. MD IMDAD,MD IMRAN,MD R ISLAM,MS F HUSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 30.07.2026 Heard Mr. SM Abdullah P, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. D.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. By this application, the petitioner has prayed for pre arrest bail in connection with Rupahihat Police Station Case No. 119/2026 registered under Section 140(2) Page No.# 2/3 of the BNS, 2023. The FIR on the basis of which the petitioner apprehends arrest was lodged on 04.05.2026 by the police personnel of Kawaimari Police Outpost stating inter alia that on information received that two unknown persons have been forcibly abducted and brought to Kadamguri village in black color vehicle by six- seven unknown persons, the police personnel reached the particular place and upon arrival at the said village, they saw one black color vehicle parked outside the house of one of the accused person. It was further alleged that wife of the said accused person informed the police personnel that the vehicle belongs to her relatives, who had come for visit. However, the police personnel on inquiry found that in the said vehicle persons were kidnapped and brought to the said place. Local villagers also stated before the police personnel about other accused persons who were involved in the said incident. As far as the petitioner is concerned, the police personnel found his driving license inside the said vehicle when the vehicle was seized. 3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the driver of the vehicle which is owned by his mother and he used to take passengers from one place to the other and that he is not involved in the said offence. 4. Mr. D.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State on perusal of the Case Diary submits that the complicity of the petitioner was not found in the same. 5. Upon consideration of the submissions made by the learned Counsels for the parties and more so, in view of the fact that no specific allegation is made against the petitioner, this Court finds it fit to enlarge the petitioner on pre arrest bail on furnishing of bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of Arresting Authority under the following conditions: Page No.# 3/3 i) the petitioner will appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for. ii) the petitioner will not hamper, tamper with the evidence, neither influence the witnesses connected with the case. iii) the petitioner will not leave the place of jurisdiction without the permission of the Arresting Authority. 6. Petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant