Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010055602026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/585/2026 DULAL NEOG S/O SUREN NEOG R/O BAGHJAN GAON P.S. BAGHJAN DIST. TINSUKIA, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N HASAN, MR SUBHRAJIT SAIKIA,MR. A HASAN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER 05.05.2025 1. Heard learned counsel Mr. N. Hasan for the petitioner Dulal Neog who has filed this application under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with prayer for pre-arrest bail as he is apprehending arrest in connection Page No.# 2/3 with Baghjan Police Station Case No. 04/2026 under Sections 305/324(3)/61(2) (a) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 R/W section 3(2)(b) of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 R/W Section 15(2) of the Petroleum and minerals Pipelines Amendment Act, 2011. 2. Heard Mr. B. Sarmah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent State. 3. The allegation against the petitioner is that he is involved in tapping live gas pipeline for wrongful extraction of condensate oil. It is alleged that a live gas pipeline runs through the property of the petitioner and on the day of the incident, a tapping point was detected in the pipeline. Pipeline was damaged by drilling and installing a tapping point for pilferage of condensate oil. Two 50 ltrs. Plastic gallon (one full of suspected to be condensate oil and one empty) was seized in connection with 30 meters of black coloured hose pipe. 4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has raised serious objection stating that there are incriminating materials in the Case Diary against the petitioner. 5. Although it is submitted that the petitioner’s father was arrested in connection with this case, and that he has been enlarged on bail, the petitioner’s bail cannot be considered at this stage. 6. It is also submitted that custodial interrogation in a serious offence of this nature is necessary. 7. I have considered the submissions at the Bar with circumspection. 8. I have scrutinized the Case Diary. Indeed there are incriminating materials in the Case Diary against the petitioner. Offence of this nature pose grave danger of fire explosion and environmental pollution, endangering human life and public safety. Page No.# 3/3 9. It also appears that investigation may be adversely affected, if the petitioner is insulated by an order of anticipatory bail. 10. At this juncture, there appears to be no justified ground to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 11. Application with prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected at this stage. 12. In terms of the above observation, this bail application stands disposed of. 13. Send back the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant