Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010168242026 2026:GAU-AS:12695 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1845/2026 SRI PRASUN CHOUDHURY SON OF LATE PRANOY CHOUDHURY, RESIDENT OF FLAT NO.3F, NABIN APARTMENT, DURGA SHANKAR LANE, AMBICAPATTY, PS - SILCHAR, DISTRICT CACHAR, ASSAM. PIN NO-788001 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P KATAKI, SR. ADV., AJOY KUMAR ROY,MR. MEHUL SHAH,MS. K L R YANTHAN,MRS R BEGUM,MR. S C BISWAS Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, A S CHOUDHURY(INFORMANT),MR N A MAZARBHUIYA(INFORMANT) BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 02.09.2026 Mr. S. C. Biswas, the senior counsel assisted by Ms. J. Bose, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. K. Baishya, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State and Mr. A. S. Choudhury, the learned counsel for the informant. Page No.# 2/3 2. By this application, the petitioner has prayed for pre-arrest bail in connection with Silchar P.S. Case No. 636/2026, corresponding to G. R. Case No. 1112/2026, registered under Sections 316(2),318(4),336(3),340(2) of the BNS, 2023, 3. The FIR in connection with which the petitioner has prayed for pre-arrest bail was lodged by one, Smt. Anupama Deshmukh before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Cachar, Silchar, alleging inter alia that her son who stays in the State of Qatar had send money to the son of the petitioner, on being asked by the petitioner as a loan amount and that the son of the petitioner had not returned the money to her. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that although, it was the petitioner, who had requested for some money as loan from the son of the informant but the money was deposited in the account of his son and that, his son was arrested and was enlarged on bail. He also submits that the informant had alleged allegations against the petitioner, his wife and his son and that his wife is also enlarged on pre-arrest bail. 4. Mr. K. Baishya, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State, submits that, it is an admitted fact that loan was asked by the petitioner and the money was deposited in the account of the son of the petitioner. 5. Mr. A. S. Choudhury, the learned counsel for the informant, however, submits that, the case is not a simple as narrated by the counsel for the petitioner. He submits that the petitioner had many criminal antecedents. He had asked for loan from many persons and has not repaid it back and that, he is convicted in one labour case. Page No.# 3/3 6. Upon consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsel, more so, in view of the fact that the petitioner was not the person to whom the money was given. this Court deems it fit to enlarge the petitioner on pre-arrest bail on furnishing of a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with one local surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Authority under the following conditions: (i) the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within a period of 10 days from the order and as and when called for. (ii) the petitioner shall not hamper and tamper with the evidence of the case, and/or influence the witness connected with the case; and (iii) the petitioner shall not leave his residence without prior permission of the Investigating Officer. 7. The AB Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant