Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010234652025 2026:GAU-AS:242 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2537/2025 AZIZUR RAHMAN S/O KASHEM ALI SHEIKH VILL. GUTIPARA PART V, P.O. GUTIPARA, P.S. BILASIPARA, DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A M S MAZUMDER, A W BARBHUIYA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER 07.01.2026 1. Heard Mr. A. M. S. Mazumder, learned senior counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Page No.# 2/3 2. This petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the petitioner, namely, Azizur Rahman, has prayed for granting pre-arrest bail, apprehending arrest in connection with Bongaigaon PS Case No. 203/2025 registered under Section 305(b)/336(3)/339/340(2)/3(5) of BNS and added Section 338 of BNS, 2023 corresponding to GR No. 382/2025. 3. The FIR dated 07.08.2025 in a nutshell is that a bike bearing Registration No. AS-19-G-3149 has been transferred to Rafikul Islam by producing forge documents. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that pursuant to grant of interim on 28.10.2025, he appeared before the IO and statement has been record. 4. IO has submitted a bail objection in which the he has strongly objected to grant of bail. 5. The case diary also indicates significant investigation so far. It appears that the investigation has revealed sufficient incriminating materials against the present petitioner indicating his involvement in forgery of documents regarding transaction pertaining to the stolen of two wheeler. The investigation has also found that he also produced two wrong photographs in the name of the actual owner Apurba Kumar Barman. IO contended that investigation is continuing into whether there is any network of individuals involved in this alleged offenses. 6. In view of these materials and contentions of the IO, I am of the considered view that at this stage it may not be an appropriate case for granting pre-arrest bail since investigation is still in progress. Page No.# 3/3 7. Therefore vacating the interim order bail petition stands rejected at this stage. 8. Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application stands disposed of. 9. Return the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant