Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010250192025 2026:GAU-AS:1949 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2685/2025 CHITRA RANJAN BORAH S/O MANORANJAN BORAH R/O MELENG BORGURI, PS JORHAT, SUB JORHAT, DIST JORHAT, ASSAM, PIN 785006 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR D MEDHI, MR. SANU HUSSAIN,MR K THAKUR Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER 12-02-2026 Heard Mr. D. Medhi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. This is an application filed under Section 482 BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of pre-arrest bail to the accused/petitioner, namely, Chitra Ranjan Borah who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Dergaon P.S. Case No. Page No.# 2/4 106/2025 under Sections 303(2)/318(4) of BNS, 2023. 3. Case diary received. Perused the same. 4. It is submitted by Mr. Medhi, learned counsel that the present petitioner is innocent and is no way involved with the alleged offence and the only reason behind filing of this pre-arrest bail application is that police is searching for him as the main accused Mriganka Kalita was residing in his rented house and he also involved in the business of second hand vehicles. But after obtaining the order of interim pre-arrest bail, he appeared before the I.O. and cooperated with the investigation of the case and his statement was also recorded. 5. However, the petitioner is still ready and willing to extend his cooperation in the further investigation of the case, if he is granted with the privilege of pre- arrest bail. 6. Mr. Sarma, learned Addl. PP submitted in this regard that the present petitioner is very much involved in the offence, rather, the present petitioner along with one Hemen and the main accused Mriganka had sold the vehicle to one person from Nagaland, but till date the vehicle could not be recovered by police. He further submitted that from the statement made by the present petitioner as well as from the materials available in the case diary it is seen that after selling the vehicle, the amount was transacted in the account of the present petitioner along with another person and presently he is also running the account. Mr. Sarma, raised vehement objection and submitted that it is not all a fit case to extend the privilege of pre-arrest bail. 7. Mr. Medhi, learned counsel submitted in this regard that after recording of his statement by the I.O., he was never asked to appear further in the police station and he has not received any notice in that regard, though he was ready Page No.# 3/4 and willing to extend his cooperation and at the same time, he further submitted that there may an account but the sell amount was not credited in the said account. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to appear before the I.O. as and when his presence is required and he will fully cooperate in the investigation of the cases. 8. Hearing the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and I have also perused the case diary wherefrom it is seen that there are some material against the petitioner who is also seems to be involved in the alleged offence. Further, it is a fact that after his appearance and after recording of his statement by the I.O. he was not asked to appear before the I.O. and in the bail objection also it is seen that there is no statement made by the I.O. that he is not fully cooperated with the investigation of the case, nor there is any statement that he appeared before the police station. 9. In view of above, only considering this aspect of the case, the order of interim pre-arrest bail dated 13.11.2025 is hereby made absolute on the same terms and conditions with a direction to the petitioner to appear before the I.O. of the case every fortnightly, if it is required by the I.O. for the purpose of the investigation of the case. 10. The I.O. is further directed to issue notice to the petitioner in this regard, if the petitioner’s further interrogation is required in the police station. 11. This pre-arrest bail application accordingly stands disposed of. 12. Return the case diary. JUDGE Page No.# 4/4 Comparing Assistant