Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010222592026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2549/2026 GAUTAM BORO AND 3 ORS SON OF BHUPEN BORO 2: UTTAM CHANDRA BORO SON OF BHUPEN BORO 3: NITUL BORO SON OF BHUPEN BORO 4: SITTORANJAN BASUMATARY S/O- JANAK BASUMATARY ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE- KAKOHATI POLICE STATION- RANGIA DISTRICT- KAMRUP ASSAM. PIN- 78135 VERSUS STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY P.P. ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR M GARODIA, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER Date : 13.10.2026 Page No.# 2/3 Heard Mr. M. Garodia, learned counsel for the accused applicant. Also heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 2. This is an application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 praying for granting pre-arrest bail to the accused-applicants, namely 1) Gautam Boro 2) Uttam Chandra Boro 3) Nitul Boro and 4) Sittoranjan Basumatary in connection with Rangia P.S. Case No.254/2026 registered under Sections 61(2)/336(3)/338 of BNS, 2023. 3. The allegation against the accused applicants are that they applied for sale permission by committing forgery without having proper documents, which was found during hearing for sale permission. It was found that certain documents were forged by the accused applicants. 4. On the basis of the FIR, police registered Rangia P.S. Case No.254/2026 under the aforementioned sections. 5. The learned counsel for the accused applicants submits that the accused applicants are simple villagers and they have not committed any offence in the instant case. In fact, they were told by two other persons that they would be helping the accused applicants to sell the land and do the needful, including preparation of the documentation. On the belief that the documents will be properly prepared, the accused applicants, in fact, signed the aforesaid application for sale permission. He submits that the accused applicants are simple villagers and they will cooperate with the investigation and therefore, the accused applicants should be allowed to go on pre-arrest bail at this stage. Page No.# 3/3 6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer for pre- arrest bail submitted that case diary in the instant case should be perused before granting pre-arrest bail to the accused applicants. 7. Taking into account the allegations made and on perusal of the materials available in the bail application and also taking into account the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, this Court is of the opinion that the accused applicants should be granted pre-arrest bail. 8. Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest of the accused applicants named above, they shall be released on pre-arrest bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- each with a surety of like nature to the satisfaction of the Arresting Authority in connection with the aforementioned case subject to the following conditions:- (i) the accused applicants shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 10 days from today; (ii) the accused applicants shall cooperate with the investigation and make themselves available as and when called for; (iii) the accused applicants shall not tamper or hamper with the investigation of the case, in whatsoever manner. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant