Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010204672025 2026:GAU-AS:1783 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2238/2025 GANESH CH SARMAH SON OF LATE JADAV CHANDRA SARMAH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE ALKHAPARA, PO DIPILA, PS SIPAJHAR, DISTRICT DARRANG, ASSAM, PIN 784144 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M BISWAS, J SINGPHO,MS. A K CHOPHI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 10.02.2026 1. Heard Mr. M. Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Page No.# 2/3 2. This application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Ganesh Ch. Sarmah, seeking pre- arrest bail in connection with Sipajhar P.S. Case No. 104/2025 under Sections 120(B)/420/406/468 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The brief facts of the case are that on 11.07.2025, one Kulendra Deka and three others have filed an FIR before the O/C of Sipajhar P.S naming therein ten numbers of accused person including the present petitioner and it is inter alia stated that the petitioner has printed forged books and other papers in the name of one Samiti and by forging the signatures of the Secretaries of the said Samiti illegally collected a huge amount of money. It is also stated that the petitioner in connivance of accused persons had done the said act. The petitioner was enlarged on interim pre-arrest bail vide order dated 11.09.2025 with the condition that he shall appear before the I.O within a period of 10 (ten) days from the date of the said order and cooperate with the investigation. 4. In compliance of the said direction, the petitioner has appeared before the I.O within the said stipulated time and got his statement recorded and as such, it is seen that the petitioner has been cooperating with the investigation of the instant case. 5. Mr. B. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, after perusal of the case diary has acceeded to the fact that the petitioner has cooperated with the investigation although he objects to the bail as far as the merits of the case is concerned. Page No.# 3/3 6. Noticing that the petitioner has complied with the directions given in the interim order, this Court finds it fit that the interim order dated 11.09.2025 be made absolute, with the further direction that the conditions given therein be strictly followed by the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, this anticipatory bail petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant