Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010122982026 2026:GAU-AS:11753 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1393/2026 SRI RINTUMANI DAS S/O PARESH DAS R/O NO. 2 DAKHINHATI, BARPETA, P.O. AND P.S.- BARPETA DIST- BARPETA, ASSAM 2 PIN-781301 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N K KALITA, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER Date : 18.08.2026 Heard Mr. N. K. Kalita, learned counsel for the accused applicant. Also heard Ms. S. H. Borah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam as well as Mr. H. Sharma, the informant appearing in person. 2. This is an application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Page No.# 2/4 Sanhita, 2023, praying for grant of pre-arrest bail to the accused applicant in connection with Paltanbazar P.S. Case No. 155/2026, registered under Section 318(4) of the BNS, 2023. 3. The Case Diary in the instant case has been called for and the same has been received and perused. 4. An FIR was lodged on 06.06.2026 before the Officer-in-Charge, Paltanbazar Police Station, by the informant, alleging, inter alia, that the accused applicant induced the informant to invest money with him by representing that the same would be invested in the share market for good returns. It is alleged that, pursuant to such inducement, the informant started paying Rs. 5,000/- per month from June 2022 till May 2025. Accordingly, the total amount paid by the informant to the accused applicant for investment was Rs.1,80,000/-/- (Rupees One Lakhs Eighty Thousand only). By a Deed of Agreement dated 01.07.2022 executed between the informant and the accused applicant, the accused applicant had promised to return a sum of Rs. 2,56,121/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Fifty Six Thousand One Hundred and Twenty One only) to the informant, in lieu of his investment. However, when the informant asked about the returns on the investment, the accused applicant allegedly failed to give any convincing reply. It is further alleged that, when the informant asked for documents relating to the investment in the share market, the accused applicant could not provide any details thereof. Faced with the aforesaid situation, the informant lodged the aforesaid FIR. 5. On receipt of the FIR, the police registered with Paltanbazar P.S. Case No. 155/2026 under Section 318(4) of the BNS, 2023. 6. On apprehension of arrest, the accused applicant approached this Court Page No.# 3/4 by filing the instant anticipatory bail application. On 26.06.2026, a coordinate Bench of this Court, after hearing the parties and taking note of the assurance given by the accused applicant that he would return the entire amount of Rs. 1,80,000/- within three months, passed the interim pre-arrest bail order. 7. Mr. Kalita, learned counsel for the accused applicant, submits that, in terms of the aforesaid interim pre-arrest bail order dated 26.06.2026, the accused applicant has already appeared before the I.O. of the case, and his statement has also been recorded. 8. It is seen that, on 27.07.2026, the interim pre-arrest bail granted, vide order dated 26.06.2026 was extended for a period of 15 (fifteen) days, due to the assurance of the accused applicant on 26.06.2026 that the entire amount of Rs.1,80,000/- shall be paid within a period of 3 (three) months on an installment basis. However, no payment has been made till date. It is also seen that no money has been invested by the accused applicant as promised by the accused applicant though he received the monthly payments from the informant. 9. The learned counsel for the accused applicant submits that, due to certain financial constraints in arranging the money, the accused applicant could not make the payment. 10. Taking into account the entire facts and circumstances of the case as well as materials available in the Case Diary and the fact that the accused applicant could not fulfil his assurance of repaying the amount of Rs. 1,80,000/- within the stipulated period, this Court is of the considered opinion that the interim pre-arrest bail granted, vide order dated 26.06.2026 is liable to be cancelled. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is disposed of by cancelling the Page No.# 4/4 interim pre-arrest bail granted, vide order dated 26.06.2026. 11. In view of the above, the instant anticipatory bail application stands dismissed. 12. Case Diary to be returned. JUDGE Comparing Assistant