Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010201582026 2026:GAU-AS:13762 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2251/2026 ALMAZAD HUSSAIN ALIAS ALMAJAD HUSSAIN S/O LATE AKBAR ALI, R/O ROWTA, DHANSIRIKHUTI, PO BHALUKMARI, PS ROWTA, DIST UDALGURI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR SARFRAZ NAWAZ, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 16.09.2026 1. Heard Mr. A.W. Awan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned APP appearing for the State of Assam. 2. By this application the petitioner has prayed for pre-arrest bail in connection with Gobardhana P.S. Case No. 63/2026 registered under Sections 318(4)/316(2)/319(1) of the BNS, 2023. Page No.# 2/3 3. The FIR in connection with which the petitioner is apprehending arrest was lodged on 24.07.2026 by the President of MBC/BPF stating inter alia that it was found that the petitioner along with one Matior Rahman was collecting bribes in the name of various schemes under the BTC Government from contractors and others by impersonating themselves as the personal assistants of the Hon’ble Executive Member, BTC. It was further alleged that the other accused, namely, Matior Rahman had collected a sum of Rs.2,50,000/-. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegations in the FIR are not specific and that it is merely stated therein that the petitioner was found to be taking bribe under various schemes. He further submits that while specific allegations have been made against the co-accused, no specific allegation has been made against the petitioner. 5. Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned APP however submits that the allegations are serious in nature relating to demand of bribe in the name of various schemes under the BTC Government. He therefore prays that the case diary be called for. 6. Upon consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsels, more so in view of the fact that no specific allegation has been made against the petitioner, this Court finds it fit to enlarge the petitioner on pre-arrest bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Authority subject to the following conditions: (i) The petitioner shall positively appear before the Investigating Officer within a period of 10 (ten) days from today and shall cooperate with the investigation in all respects, (ii) The petitioner shall not hamper or tamper with the evidence of the Page No.# 3/3 case and shall not, directly or indirectly, influence or induce any witness connected with the case; (iii) The petitioner shall not leave his place of residence without the prior permission of the Investigating Officer; and (iv) The petitioner shall also cooperate with the Investigating Officer by producing all relevant documents in his possession as and when required. 7. In the event of violation of any of the aforesaid conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of the bail in accordance with law. 8. Accordingly, this Anticipatory Bail application is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant