Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010195982026 2026:GAU-AS:13212 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2177/2026 RUPALI BHATTA D/O MADHAB CHANDRA BHATTA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MARANJANA, .- MARANJANA, P.S. - RANGIA, DIST KAMRUP RURAL, ASSAM, PIN 781354 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. I H LASKAR, MS. N M LONGKENG,MR. R. KARIM,MR. P K DEKA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER 10.09.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This is an application filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 for granting Page No.# 2/3 bail to the petitioner in connection with Rangia P.S. Case No. 254/2026 (G.R. No. 519/2026) alleging an offence under Sections 61(2)/336(3)/338 of the BNS, 2023. 3. In the instant case, the Circle Officer, Rangia Revenue Circle had lodged an FIR where from it appears that certain Notary Affidavits were submitted in support of the NOC applications for Land Sale Permission which were submitted by certain persons and upon verification, it was found that the deponents of the said affidavits never signed the affidavits. 4. The petitioner herein is the advocate who identified the deponent before the notary public. The Case Diary is available as it was called for in connection with another bail application namely AB No. 1869/2026 which was disposed of by Order dated 13.08.2026. In that case, the petitioner who was one of the notaries who had authorized the said affidavits had been granted a privilege of pre-arrest bail. 5. On perusal of the Case Diary, it appears that the present petitioner had already appeared before the IO, and her statement had been recorded but she was not taken into custody. From the above, it appears that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner may not be necessary. Page No.# 3/3 6. Having regard to the above, it is directed that the petitioner, in the event of her arrest, in connection with the aforesaid case is directed to be released on interim bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Authority. 7. It is further provided that the petitioner shall fully co-operate with the investigation as and when called for by the IO. 8. Send back the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant