Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010205842026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2890/2026 PHATIK CHUTIA SON OF LATE CHENIRAM CHUTIA RESIDENT OF BOSACHUK POLICE STATION BOGINADI PIN 787032 DISTRICT LAKHIMPUR ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. S G BARUAH, MS C SAIKIA,MR. B BORGOHAIN,MR B SAIKIA,MR. S NEOG Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 23.09.2026 Heard Ms. S. G. Baruah, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Sarma, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. 2. By this application, the petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Boginadi PS Case No. 97/2026, corresponding to G.R. Case No.847/2026, registered under Sections 351(2), 351(3), 308(6), 308(7), 318(4), 319(2), 317(4), 61(2), 112, 3(5), 3(6), 3(8), 3(9) of Page No.# 2/3 BNS, 2023. 3. The FIR in connection with which the petitioner was arrested and put behind the bars since 05.09.2026, was lodged by the police personnel of Boginadi Police Station, stating, inter alia, that the petitioner, along with others, without any authority or without any professional qualification have stationed themselves in and around the premises of the police station and were making a livelihood from the members of the public, who come to the police station. It is also stated that the said petitioner along with others used to take money from the persons who come to the police station for police related work. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that similar FIRs have been lodged in several cases and that the contents of the said FIRs are also substantially similar. She further submits that the informant conducted an enquiry within a period of 15 minutes and thereafter arrested the petitioner and has put him behind the bars. She submits that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner and that similar FIRs have been lodged against several other persons. 5. Mr. B. Sarma, the learned APP for the State, however, submits that it has been specifically stated in the FIR that the petitioner is involved in luring persons who come to the police station either for lodging a case or for entering into a settlement, and that he takes money from them. 6. Upon consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsels, more so in view of the fact that, the same allegations are leveled against so many accused persons including the petitioner by filing different FIR, this court deems it fit to enlarge the petitioner on bail on furnishing of a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with one local surety of the like amount of the satisfaction of the CJM, Lakhimpur, North Lakhimpur under the following conditions: (i) The petitioner shall positively appear before the Investigating Officer as and when call for. Page No.# 3/3 (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