Page No.# 1/4 GAHC020008532026 2026:GAU-NL:549 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH Case No. : AB/14/2026 SRI ANURAG KUMAR CHAUDHARY S/O SRI DEVINDRA SINGH, R/O SECTOR 14, ASHOKA SOCIETY HOUSE NO. 5/14A, VASUNDHARA, GHAZIABAD - 201012 VERSUS THE STATE OF NAGALAND REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Advocate for the Petitioner : THUYEKHRULU, Advocate for the Respondent : P.P, NAGALAND, BEFORE HONBLE MR JUSTICE NCHUMBEMO MOZHUI O R D E R 13.10.2026 Heard Mr. A.K. Gupta, learned counsel assisted by Ms. Thuyekhrulu, learned counsel for the Applicant. Also heard Mr. Veto V. Zhimomi, learned Public Prosecutor for the Respondent/State . Page No.# 2/4 2. The Applicant has filed the instant application U/s 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Dimapur East P.S. Case No. 133/2025 U/S 420/406 of the IPC. 3. This hon’ble Court, by Order dated 09.10.2026 was pleased to grant interim protection to the Petitioner on the condition that on the next returnable date, in the event the Applicant is arrested by the Police in connection with the above referred case, he shall be released on ad interim pre-arrest bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) to the satisfaction of the Arresting Authority. 4. Further, the Applicant was directed to appear before the Investigating Officer (I.O.) on 12.10.2026 for recording his statement. 5. Mr. Veto V. Zhimomi, learned Public Prosecutor for the State, as directed by this Court on 09.10.2026, had produced the updated Case Diary of the case and submits that the Applicant, inspite of the several notices issued to the Applicant to appear before the I.O., he intentionally avoided the notice and accordingly, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dimapur had issued a non-bailable warrant against him by Order dated 09.10.2025. The Applicant approached this hon’ble Court by filing Criminal Petition No. 37/2025 praying for quashing of the criminal proceedings against him U/s 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and for quashing of the non-bailable warrant in Dimapur East P.S. Case No. 133/2025 U/S 420/406 of IPC. Page No.# 3/4 6. By Order dated 07.11.2025, this hon’ble Court was pleased to grant interim relief of applicant by staying the non-bailable warrant dated 09.10.2025. 7. However, the Criminal Petition No. 37/2025 was dismissed by this hon’ble Court by Order dated 18.09.2026. Further, the interim protection given to the Petitioner till 09.10.2026 was not extended in view of the dismissal of the criminal petition. Further, this Court by Order dated 18.09.2026, while considering the case had given the liberty to the Petitioner to file appropriate application, if so advised. 8. In terms of the directions of this hon’ble Court in the earlier criminal proceedings which was ultimately dismissed, the Petitioner has filed the instant anticipatory bail application. This hon’ble Court, by Order dated 09.10.2026 while issuing notice had directed that till the next returnable date, if the Petitioner is arrested, he shall be released on ad interim pre-arrest bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand). Further, he was directed to appear on 10.12.2026 before the Investigating Officer for recording his statement. 9. In terms of the directions of this hon’ble Court by Order dated 09.10.2026, when the query was put upon the Applicant it has been submitted that he has not complied with the direction of this Court by appearing before the I.O. on 12.10.2026. It is also observed that the Applicant, inspite of a specific direction of this hon’ble Court to appear before the I.O. dated 12.10.2026 has miserably failed to comply with such directions which amounts to undermining the authority of this Court and Page No.# 4/4 at this juncture, this Court deem fit that the interim order passed on 09.10.2026 should not be extended. 10. Taking a serious consideration of the attitude of the Applicant in not complying with the Court’s direction, this Court is not inclined to grant any interim/absolute relief as sought for in the instant application. 11. Accordingly, the instant application is dismissed. No order as to cost. JUDGE Comparing Assistant