Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010159292026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1800/2026 HEDAYAT ULLAH KHAN SON OF LT. ANUWAR HUSSAIN KHAN RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO.25, VILLAGE JARAMARI, P.O BALISATRA NAGAON UNDER DHING POLICE STATION DISTRICT - NAGAON, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A M BORA, MS. C CHOUDHURY,MR. D GAGAI,MR. D K BAIDYA,MR. V A CHOWDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER Date : -03.09.2026 Heard, Mr. A.M. Bora, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. C. Chowdhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam. Page No.# 2/3 2. This is an application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 whereby the petitioner, namely, Hedayat Ullah Khan is seeking Anticipatory Bail apprehending arrest in connection with an FIR, which is registered as Nagaon Police Station Case No. 520/2026 registered under Sections 61(2)/248 of BNS, 2023 read with Section 25 (1-A) of Arms Act, 1959. 3. As per the facts reflected in the FIR, one firearm was recovered from the house of one Dulal Uddin by the police after receiving a tip-off. However, subsequent investigation revealed that it was another accused, namely, Shah Jamal Ali, who had concealed the firearm in the house compound of the said Dulal Uddin, and he was subsequently arrested. 4. It appears that, in the course of investigation, the said accused, Shah Jamal Ali, had implicated the present petitioner as the person who had placed the firearm at the place of occurrence and had informed the said accused accordingly. However, apart from the statement of the co-accused, it appears that there is no other material against the present petitioner. As per the case diary and the seizure list, it is seen that the firearm was seized on being shown by the accused, Shah Jamal Ali. Even as per the FIR as well as the supervisory note, it was the accused, Shah Jamal Ali, who had concealed the firearm and ammunition with the intention of falsely implicating Dulal Uddin. 5. Pursuant to the interim protection granted by this Court, the petitioner had appeared before the Investigating Officer, and his statement was also recorded, wherein he denied having any knowledge of the firearm and claimed that he had been falsely implicated on account of prior disputes. It is stated in the bail objection that the victim, Dulal Uddin, has reported that the family members of Page No.# 3/3 the petitioner have been visiting his house and threatening him to withdraw the case. However, the case itself was lodged by the police, which the victim cannot obviously withdraw. 6. Having regard to the above, I am of the view that the petitioner may be granted the privilege of pre-arrest bail by imposing suitable conditions. Accordingly, the order of interim pre-arrest bail dated 07/08/2026 is hereby made absolute on the following condition that:- 1. The petitioner shall continue to cooperate with the investigation as and when called for. 2. The petitioner shall not try to intimidate the victim Dulal Uddin or his family members either directly or through any other person, nor shall he try to intimidate any other person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case. Violation of any of the aforesaid conditions would entail cancellation of the bail. 7. The Anticipatory Bail petition, is accordingly stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant