Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010206862026 2026:GAU-AS:13987 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2852/2026 ANUJ KUMAR S/O-JAMUNA DAS, R/O- BHADAU P.S.- JASRANA, DIST FIROZABAD, UTTAR PRADESH. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY P.P. ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S M ABDULLAH P, MR. J JAKARIA,MD IMRAN,MD R ISLAM,MS F HUSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 22.09.2026 Heard Mr. S. M. Abdullah, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R. J. Baruah, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. 2. By this application, the petitioners have prayed for bail in connection with Nalbari Police Station Case No. 190/2026,registered under Sections 316(2), 316(5), 318(4), 61(2) of BNS, 2023. 3. The FIR in connection with which the petitioner was arrested and put behind the bars for the last 24 days, lodged on 31.08.2026, by the local public stating inter alia that the road, which was used by approximately 15 to 20 villages to reach the highway was being repaired by a company on the strength of the work order issued by the PWD Department and that, the work was not conducted properly and the construction and repair of the road was not completed within the time frame and that money was also taken by the contractors. It is further alleged that the road was still in the dilapidated condition and there is lots of difficulty at large. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is simply the site engineer associated with the work and that, he has the duty of only supervising the said work. The petitioner was found at his work place and he was apprehended by the public and was handed over to the police and that petitioner was arrested and was kept behind the bars as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that extension has been granted for completion of the work order till 30th of September, 2026. 5. Mr. R. J. Baruah, the learned APP, for the State, on the other hand submits, that the Case Diary be called for, in order to see actual work that was assigned to the petitioner in connection with the construction and repair of the road. He submits that, although the petitioner stated that he is the site engineer but what exact role he has needs to be seen from the Case Diary. 6. On consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsels, more so in view of the fact, Page No.# 3/3 that the Managing Director of the said company is somebody else and that the petitioner is only the site engineer and the extension for the constructional road is also allowed, this Court deems it fit, to enlarge the petitioner on bail on furnishing of a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) of the like amount to the satisfaction of the CJM, Nalbari under the following conditions: (i) The petitioner shall positively appear before the Investigating Officer as and when call for. (ii) The petitioner shall not hamper and tamper with the evidence of the case, and/or influence the witness connected with the case; and (iii) The petitioner shall not leave their residence without prior permission of the Investigating Officer. 7. The Bail Applications stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant