Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010194712026 2026:GAU-AS:13767 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2189/2026 MANSHER ALI SON OF SEKAN ALI RESIDENT OF BAHUWA POLICE STATION- PALASHBARI DISTRICT- KAMRUP ASSAM 2: MD JAINUDDIN AHMED SON OF LATE SAHED ALI RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- BHOLAGAON POLICE STATION- PALASHBARI DISTRICT- KAMRUP ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR. R KONWAR Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 16-09-2026 Heard Mr. H. Ali, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Mr. R.J. Page No.# 2/3 Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. By this application, the petitioners have prayed for pre arrest bail in connection with Palashbari P.S. Case No. 200/2026 registered under Sections 308(4)/308(6)/351(2)/232(1) as well as 3(5) of BNS, 2023. The FIR in connection with which the petitioners are apprehending arrest was lodged on 01.09.2026 by Tahidur Rahman stating inter alia that he had invested his hard earn money in Rani Bholagaon Gaon Panchayat Samabai Samittee Limited and that on maturity of the said invested amount, he was not paid back his money and that the accused persons including the petitioners had not paid him. It is also stated that the petitioners have threatened him with serious consequences if he remains a witness in the earlier Palashbari PS Case No. 171/2026. 3. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that there are no specific allegations against the petitioners in the said FIR and the FIR reveals a concocted story. 4. Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State submits that it is in the statement of the informant as well as other witnesses that the petitioners have threatened the informant as stated in the FIR. 5. Upon considerations of the submissions made by the learned Counsels and the case diary reveals that no specific allegations were Page No.# 3/3 made against the petitioners neither in the statements of the witnesses. Further it is seen that petitioners were enlarged on interim pre arrest bail vide order dated 11.09.2026 on the ground that they should appear before the Investigating Officer for recording his statement. 6. Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State on perusal of the Case Diary submits that statements of the petitioners were recorded and as such, it is seen they are cooperating and accordingly, the interim order dated 11.09.2026 is made absolute on the following conditions: i) The petitioners will appear before the IO as and when called for. ii) the petitioners will not hamper, tamper with the evidence, neither influence the witnesses connected with the case. iii) the petitioners will not leave the place of jurisdiction without the permission of the Arresting Authority. 7. Petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant