Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010061182019 2026:GAU-AS:10461 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/1947/2019 MANOJ KALITA S/O. LT. TABURAM KALITA, R/O. PUB GEETANAGAR, NEAR GURUKUL SCHOOL, P.S. NOONMATI, GUWAHATI-24, DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS. THROUGH THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, HOME DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06. 2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM ULUBARI GUWAHATI-37. 3:THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE GUWAHATI PANBAZAR KAMRUP (M) GUWAHATI-01. 4:THE OFFICER IN CHARGE LATASIL POLICE STATION GUWAHATI-01 ASSAM. 5:HEMANTA KR. DAS @ SANKAR RAJ SINGH S/O. GURUDAYAL DAS Page No.# 2/4 R/O. BISWANATH CHARIALI P.S. BISWANATH CHARIALI DIST. BISWANATH CHARIALI ASSAM. 6:GAURAV BEZBARUAH S/O. SANA BEZBARUAH R/O. PORAKUCHI SANDHYA NALBARI DIST. NALBARI ASSAM- PRESENT ADDRESS- PAIKARKUCHI BEZBARUAH SUBURI RANGIA P.S. RANGIA DIST. KAMRUP ASSAM. 7:UCO BANK SILPUKHURI BRANCH SILPUKHURI GUWAHATI-781003 For the Petitioner(s) : XXXX For the Respondent(s) : Mr. H. Sarmah, Govt. Advocate Mr. P. C. Goswami, Advocate BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH O R D E R 29.07.2026 None appears on behalf of the Petitioner on call. Mr. H. Sarmah, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the Respondent Nos.1, 2, 3 & 4. Mr. P. C. Goswami, the learned Page No.# 3/4 counsel appears on behalf of the Respondent No.7. 2. This Court duly takes note of that the Petitioner had been granted various opportunities to take steps upon the Respondent No.5, however, the Petitioner has not chosen to do so. Be that as it may, this Court also finds it relevant to take note of the reliefs which have been sought for by the Petitioner in the present proceedings. The Petitioner's grievance is on account of the investigation in Lotasil P.S. Case No.296/2013 being not properly conducted and as such directions have been sought for to conduct the investigation and arrest the private Respondents. 3. It is the opinion of this Court that if the Petitioner is not convinced with the investigations so carried out, the remedy of the Petitioner lies before the concerned jurisdictional Magistrate. Further to that, it is also the opinion of this Court that as to whether the private Respondent should be arrested or not comes within the ambit of the investigating agency and it is not for this Court in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution to pass directions to arrest the accused. 4. Under such circumstances, this Court does not find any merit in the present proceedings initiated under Article 226 of the Constitution, for which the writ petition stands dismissed. 5. The dismissal of the instant proceedings shall not affect the Page No.# 4/4 investigation or any further proceedings thereupon in connection with Latasil P.S. Case No.293/2013. JUDGE Comparing Assistant