Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010169362026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1879/2026 AHMED FARAZ SON. OF NAZRUL ISLAM RESIDENTS OF 19A, BYELANE-3, KABARSTHAN PATH, PANJABARI ROAD, SIXMILE, GUWAHATI-22, DISTRICT- KAMRUP(M), ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. T J MAHANTA, MS P SARMA,MS. P P DAS Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER Date : 12.08.2026 Heard Mr. T. J. Mahanta, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. P. P. Das, learned counsel for the accused applicant. Also heard Mr. K. K. Parashar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. 2. This is an application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023, praying for Page No.# 2/4 grant of pre-arrest bail to the accused applicant in connection with CID P.S. Case No.01/2026, registered under Sections 61(2)/198/223/255/316(2) of BNS, 2023. 3. The gist of the facts is that on 26.02.2026, one Shri Vikram Dev Sharma, ACS, Secretary to the Government of Assam, Personnel Department, lodged a Complaint/FIR before the Special Director General of Police, Criminal Investigation Department (CID), Assam, alleging, inter alia, that the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court, by its common judgment and order dated 20.06.2025 passed in W.A. No. 14/2022 and a batch of 47 connected writ appeals, had allowed the appeals and directed that the appellants who had completed their initial probationary period of two years, within the stipulated period, be reinstated. A fresh discharge order dated 11.07.2025, issued in respect of Smt. Suranjita Hazarika, was never served upon her. It was further alleged that the Transport Department issued a fresh discharge order vide Notification dated 11.07.2025, along with a corrigendum dated 21.07.2025, in compliance with the Hon’ble Court’s direction. However, due to the non-service of the aforesaid order upon Smt. Suranjita Hazarika, she approached the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court by filing a contempt proceeding, being Contempt Case (C) No. 33/2026, alleging wilful disobedience of the judgment and order dated 20.06.2025. 4. It is stated that the Hon’ble Court, vide an interim order dated 18.02.2026, directed the respondents/contemnors to permit the petitioner therein, to join her service within 30 (thirty) days from the date of the said order. It was alleged that the circumstances surrounding the service of the discharge order disclosed serious administrative lapses and that the possibility of criminal conspiracy or connivance amongst government employees to deliberately ensure non-service of the order could not be ruled out. In terms of the aforesaid Complaint/FIR, Page No.# 3/4 CID P.S. Case No. 01/2026 under the aforementioned sections has been registered. 5. Mr. Mahanta, learned Senior Counsel for the accused applicant, submits that there is no specific allegation against him. However, the accused applicant is also serving in the Department as a Research Assistant in the Transport Department. He submits that two other persons working in the same Department have been arrested and produced before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M), and they have also been granted bail. The learned Senior Counsel submits that there is no ingredient of Section 316(2) of the BNS, which is a non-bailable offence, present in the instant case. He submits that the accused applicant has already appeared before the I.O. of the case and his statement has also been recorded. He submits that, in view of the aforesaid, custodial detention of the accused applicant may not be required in the instant case. 6. Mr. Parashar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submits that the Case Diary be called for and the matter be considered upon perusal thereof. 7. Taking into account the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties and upon perusal of the materials brought on record, this Court is of the opinion that the accused-applicant deserves to be granted the privilege of pre-arrest bail at this stage. 8. Accordingly, in the event of the arrest of the accused applicant in connection with CID P.S. Case No.01/2026, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.30,000/- with one surety of like nature to the satisfaction of the Arresting Authority, subject to the following conditions: Page No.# 4/4 i. That the accused applicant shall fully cooperate with the investigation and make himself available as and when called for; and ii. That the accused applicant shall not try to hamper or tamper with the investigation in whatsoever manner. 9. In view of the aforesaid directions, the instant anticipatory bail application stands disposed of as allowed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant