Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010060732026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/659/2026 ABHISHEK THAKURI ALIAS ABHISHEKH THAKURI SON OF MUNNA THAKURI R/O HOUSE NO. 21, GUNAMAYEE ROAD, TARAPUR, P.O. TARAPUR P.S. SILCHAR, DIST. CACHAR, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR M HOQUE, MS J BEGUM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER Date : 30.03.2026 Heard Mr. M. Hoque, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P.S. Lahkar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. By this subsequent application filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, Page No.# 2/3 2023 the petitioner, namely, Abhishek Thakuri @ Abhishekh Thakuri, has prayed for pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime Branch P.S. Case No. 12/2025 under Section 316/318/61 of BNS, 2023. 3. This is the subsequent bail petition as the earlier bail petition was rejected on 08.01.2026 in AB 2998/2025. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that sufficient time has elapsed since the date of last rejection and that he is willing to cooperate with the investigation and record his statement. And that in the event of being granted bail, he shall abide by any conditions. 5. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor on the basis of the updated case diary submits that in the intervening period, several other witnesses have been examined and one witness was examined specifically pertaining to the present petitioner and he has implicated him. 6. The said statement from the case diary has been placed before this Court and I perused the same in which there is implication against the present petitioner in as much as the witness has stated that he was offered to pay Rs. 7 lakhs for making some manipulation in the over during the tournament. 7. In the given facts and circumstances, I am unable to agree with the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner and rather, I agree with the contention of the prosecution that there are no sufficient new grounds to take a different view in this petition. Page No.# 3/3 8. Accordingly, the petition stands rejected at this time. 9. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant