Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010170902026 2026:GAU-AS:12849 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2309/2026 SMTI BOBITA CHETIA S/O SRI GOURANGA LAHON R/O - L.K PATH, BONGAL PUKHURI, P.S - JORHAT, P.O - JORHAT, DIST - JORHAT, ASSAM, 785001 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE P.P, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H BARUAH, MS. D B GOHAIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 03.09.2026 Heard Mr H Baruah, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr Bankim Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. 2. By this application the petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Abhayapuri PS Case No. 189 of 2026, registered under Sections 3(5)/3(6)/3(7)/3(8)/61(2)/ 316(5)/112 of the BNS, 2023. 3. The First Information Report in connection with which the petitioner was arrested, was lodged by the petitioner herself on 27.07.2026. It is stated in the FIR by the Page No.# 2/3 petitioner that it had come to her knowledge that an amount of Rs. 52, 76,000/- was transferred from the Government Account to the personal savings account of Mrs. Morjina Khatun, who was working as the President of Block Resource Centre as well as Mrs. Laily Begum, who was working as the Secretary of the said centre, during the period from 4th of February, 2025 to 10th of June, 2026, without lawful authority and in violation of the rules and procedures. On receipt of the said FIR, the Abhayapuri PS Case was registered as stated above. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was called for interrogation on 01.08.2026, by the Police Officer of the Abhayapuri Police Station and that during the said interrogation, in the midnight, the petitioner was served with the grounds of arrest and was apprehended, considering her as an accused person. He, further submits that the entire responsibility of managing the Government Account was with the President and Secretary of Block Resource Centre and the petitioner being the Block Project Manager, although has the overall responsibility of the Block Resource Centre, but she has no role in managing the Government account related to the Block Resource Centre. He further submits that the petitioner has a small child of 9 (nine) months and that she has been inside the jail with her minor child since the date of her arrest on 01.08.2026. 5. On the other hand, Mr Bankim Sarma, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, on perusal of the Case Diary submits that the petitioner is in fact, has the responsibility to look after the working of the Block Resource Centres. He submits the contents of the forwarding report, wherein it was stated that the petitioner is in overall charge of the finances of the Block Mission Management Unit and is responsible for monitoring the disbursal of the fund and other related works. He further submits that the investigation is at the nascent stage and a number of beneficiaries were yet to be examined and the documents are yet to be scrutinized. 6. Upon consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsel for all the Page No.# 3/3 parties, this Court finds as follows:- It is seen that the petitioner was although in overall charge of the finances of the Block Mission Management Unit, but her responsibility was to the extent of monitoring the disbursal of fund and its applications to the intended entrepreneurs. In the forwarding report, it has been categorically stated that the petitioner upon finding the anomaly, did not cause the operation of the said account to be stopped or the account to be frozen and she did not move for removal of the President and Secretary from their offices. However, it is seen that the petitioner had lodged an FIR against the President and Secretary of the Block Resource Centre, immediately, upon coming to know about the anomaly. As such, this Court finds it fit to enlarge the petitioner on bail on furnishing of a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/-, with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned SDJM, North Salmara, Abhayapuri/concerned Court, under the following conditions:- i) the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer/concerned Court as and when called for. ii) the petitioner shall not hamper and tamper with the evidence of the case, and/or influence the witnesses; and iii) the petitioner shall not leave his residence without prior permission of the Investigating Officer. 7. Bail Application stands disposed of. 8. Send back the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant