Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010210722026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2939/2026 MANOJ BORO SON OF LATE ANIL BORO RESIDENT OF VILLAGE JUGDOL PS SONAPUR DISTRICT KAMRUP (METRO)ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. SURAJIT DAS, MR. I U CHOWDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 24.09.2026 1. Heard Mr. S. Das, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned APP appearing for the State of Assam. 2. By way of the present application, the petitioner has prayed for grant of bail in connection with Crime Police Station Case No. 07/2026, registered under Sections 351(2), 351(3), 308(6), 308(7), 318(4), 319(2), 317(4), 61(2), 112, 3(5), 3(6), Page No.# 2/3 3(8) and 3(9) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. The FIR in connection with which the petitioner was arrested on 05.09.2026 was lodged by the Officer-in-Charge of Dispur Police Station, Police Commissionerate, Guwahati, Assam, stating inter alia that the petitioner along with another person and others without holding any position, authority or professional qualification had stationed themselves in and around police stations and by targeting persons who came there for police-related work had collected money from them and interfered with the work for which they had approached the police station. It is further stated that the petitioner and others had been making their livelihood out of such activities. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner and that the allegations made against him are vague in nature. He further submits that the petitioner, along with another person, has merely been mentioned in a chart forming part of the FIR. 5. Mr. R. J. Baruah, learned APP however submits that the allegations made in the FIR disclose an organized crime allegedly committed by several persons including the petitioner. He therefore prays that the case diary be called for to ascertain the nature and extent of the alleged offence as well as the complicity of the petitioner. 6. On consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, more so in view of the fact that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner and also that no victim has been specifically mentioned in the FIR as having been allured by the petitioner, this Court deems it fit to enlarge the petitioner on 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 learned Page No.# 3/3 CJM, Kamrup (M) subject to the following conditions: (i) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for, (ii) The petitioner shall not hamper and tamper with the evidence of the case, and/or influence the witnesses; and (iii) The petitioner shall not leave his place of residence without the prior permission of the Investigating Officer. 7. Accordingly, this Bail Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant