Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010159312026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1737/2026 H. M. MURTAZA LASKAR AND ANR S/O LATE MASADDAR ALI LASKAR, R/O VILLAGE GOBINDAPUR PART-II, P.O. GOBINDAPUR EAST, P.S. SILCHAR SADAR, DISTRICT CACHAR, ASSAM, PIN-788101. 2: YAHIA LASKAR S/O LATE MASADDAR ALI LASKAR R/O VILLAGE GOBINDAPUR PART-II P.O. EAST GOBINDAPUR P.S. SILCHAR SADAR DISTRICT CACHAR ASSAM PIN-78810 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. O LASKAR, MS A GOGOI,MR. U N CHATTRY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 31.07.2026 1. Heard Mr. O. Laskar, learned counsel appearing for the accused petitioners as well as Ms. S. H. Bora, learned Addl. P.P., Assam appearing for the State Page No.# 2/3 respondent. 2. By this petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the petitioners, namely, H. M. Murtaza Laskar and Yahia Laskar have prayed for granting pre-arrest bail, apprehending arrest in connection with Lakhipur P.S. Case No. 130/2026 corresponding to GR Case No. 163/2026 registered under Section 316(2)/318(4)/351(2)/352/3(5) of BNS, 2023. 3. The FIR in connection with which the petitioners apprehend arrest was lodged on 23/6/2026 alleging inter alia that the informant had given the petitioners an amount of rupees nineteen lakhs on the promise that the petitioners would use that amount in a construction work and would return to him along with the profits obtained by the petitioners. 4. However, it is stated that that after completion of the construction work, petitioners did not return the said money to the informant for which a village meeting was called and in the settlement reached in the said meeting, it is stated that the petitioners returned an amount of ₹13,80,000/- to the informant in installments. The petitioner further states that as far as the remaining amount as well as the profits are concerned, the petitioners had issued a cheque which got bounced due to insufficient funds. 5. It is stated by the informant that he met the petitioners and when he asked his money back, the petitioners abused him assaulted him and threatened to kill him if he files any case against the petitioners. It was also alleged in the said FIR that an additional amount of three lakhs was also taken from the informant. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no intention not to Page No.# 3/3 return the money on the part of the petitioners and he submits that if there is any money left to be returned to the informant, the petitioners will return the same and that there are no ingredients of cheating attracted in the instant case against the petitioners. 7. Learned Additional Public prosecutor submits that there is clear allegation in the FIR that on asking the remaining money back the petitioners assaulted the informant. 8. On consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsels more so in view of the fact that that the petitioners have in fact returned a considerable amount of money to the informant, this Court finds it fit to release the petitioners on pre-arrest bail on furnishing of a bail bond of Rs.20,000/- each with one local surety of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the arresting authority under the following conditions that the petitioners: (i) will appear before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today. (ii) will not influence the witnesses connected with the incident case. (iii) will not hamper or tamper with the evidence of the case. If the petitioner is found violating any of the conditions, his bail order will be amenable for cancellation. 9. Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant