Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010278892025 2026:GAU-AS:1652 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2952/2025 ABDUL WAHID ALIAS WAHIDUL S/O ABDUL AWAL MANDAL ALIAS ABDUL AWAL, , R/O MARKAZ ROAD, WARD NO 19, HOJAI TOWN, PO AND PS HOJAI, DIST HOJAI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR A W AMAN, A MISHRA,MD A RAHMAN,SAMIM RAHMAN,MS SURAYA RAHMAN,MR SARFRAZ NAWAZ,MR. SURAJIT DAS Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 09-02-2026 Heard Mr. S. Nawaz, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of State respondent. Page No.# 2/3 2. This is an application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 for granting pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, namely, Abdul Wahid @ Wahidul in connection with Hojai P.S. Case No. 184/2025 under Sections 115(2)/324/351/109/221/132/189 /190/191/195 of BNS, 2023. 3. Case Diary received. Perused the same. 4. It is submitted by Mr. Nawaz, the learned counsel for the petitioner that in pursuant to Order dated 16.12.2025 the accused/petitioner had appeared before the I/O and extended his cooperation in the investigation of this case. He further submitted that some of the co-accused/petitioners are on regular bail and some others in absolute anticipatory bail in connection with the recent case. However, this petitioner is still ready willing to extent his cooperation in further investigation of the case, if interim bail granted on 16.12.2025 is made absolute. 5. Mr. Borthakur, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted in this regard that the Case Diary reveals that the accused/petitioner had appeared before the I/O and cooperated in the investigation of the case. More so, he also admits that the other co-accused/persons are already on bail and they are also cooperating in the investigation. 6. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides, materials in the case record, vis-à-vis the conduct the accused/petitioner, I find that custodial interrogation may not be required in the present case and hence the interim order dated 16.12.2025 is hereby made absolute with the same terms and conditions. Page No.# 3/3 7. With the above observations, the AB stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant