Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010047062026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/614/2026 SRI SARUK SANGMA ALIAS SWARUP SANGMA SON OF SRI JEKSON SANGMA RESIDENT OF VILL- GOBARDHAN SHILLONG BASTI, PS. PRAGJYOTISHPUR, DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : A B DUTTA, MR P S RAJA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER 30.03.2026 Heard Mr. P.S. Raja, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P.S. Lahkar, learned APP for the State. 2. Invoking 482 BNSS, the petitioner is seeking anticipatory bail in connection Page No.# 2/3 with Pragjyotishpur P.S. Case No.13/2026 under Section 109/115(2)/118(2)/132/285/296/3(5)/324(4)/351(2) of the BNS, 2023. 3. The gist of the allegations in the FIR dated 05.02.2026 is that a police party, while escorting an accused person for medical examination, was attacked at the place of occurrence by the accused persons named in the FIR, resulting in injuries to the police personnel. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner denies his involvement in the alleged offence. It is contended that the incident took place in front of the petitioner’s residence and that he had merely come out as a bystander and attempted to mediate; however, he has been falsely implicated in the present case. 5. The case diary has been received. 6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that when the police party arrived at the place of occurrence at around 10:30 p.m. to 11:00 p.m., they questioned certain persons regarding their presence at that hour, which led to an altercation and subsequent assault. It is, however, fairly submitted that the injuries sustained are simple in nature. It is further submitted that the version put forth by learned counsel for the petitioner does not clearly emerge from the case diary. 7. Be that as it may, considering the nature of the allegations, the materials available on record, and the fact that the injuries are simple, this Court is of the view that the present bail application deserves to be allowed. 8. Accordingly, it is directed that, in the event of arrest of the petitioner in connection with the aforesaid case, he shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.30,000/- with one surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of Page No.# 3/3 the arresting authority, subject to the following conditions: i. The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required for recording of his statement, ii. The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses in any manner, and iii. The petitioner shall not hamper the course of investigation. 9. The case diary be returned. 10. Anticipatory Bail petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant