Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010000092026 2026:GAU-AS:1279 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/4/2026 MD ABU HANIFA S/O - ALI AKBAR R/O VILLAGE - DAKHIN ASHINAGAR, NEAR WATER SUPPLY, P.O. - NILBAGAN, P.S. - HOJAI, DISTRICT - HOJAI ASSAM, PIN - 782445 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D P BORAH, MS. S BORO,MR B PAUL Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER Date : 02.02.2026 Heard Mr. D.P. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. S.H. Bora, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Page No.# 2/3 2. This petition under Section 482 BNSS is filed by the petitioner, namely, Md. Abu Hanifa, apprehending arrest in connection with Murajhar P.S. Case No. 252/2025 registered u/s 61(2)/336(3)/340(1)/340 (2) of BNS. 3. FIR dated 3.12.2025 lodged by Sajina Begum with the allegation that some persons and shops in the Nilbagan market area were indulging in illegal business of making fake and fraudulent documents which are used for procuring various other government documents fraudulently. 4. The petitioner was granted interim bail on 06.01.2026. The learned counsel for the petitioner praying for confirming the interim bail submits that the petitioner is a headmaster of on Dighal Pukhuri High School and legitimately running study centre of Delhi State Open School. It is also submitted that the petitioner is not involved in the fraudulent activity and the documents seized by the I/O are available in the website of Delhi State Open School. 5. The case diary has been received. 6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that apart from the statement of the present petitioner being self incriminating – the statements of other witnesses have also indicated about giving certificate without holding any examination. She has also referred to certain documents seized by the I/O. The materials indicate that study centre was made upon payment of Rs.10,000/- to the Delhi State Open School. 7. I have perused the relevant portions of the case diary. From the investigation, it is revealed that the I/O initially could not seizure any documents pertaining to Delhi State Open School, from the study centre Page No.# 3/3 purportedly run by the petitioner, who as stated earlier is the headmaster of one school. Though his own statement recorded pursuant to grant of interim is self-incriminating, it is also revealed by the investigation that authorization from Delhi State Open School was also obtained by paying money with regard to back years. The statement of some witnesses about the petitioner giving them pass certificates of Class X without appearing for the examination, incriminates him. 8. Considering the fact that the matter involves manipulation and forgery of public academic documents and the fact that investigation is going on – I am of the concerned view that bail at this stage may not be in the best interest of investigation and could prejudice it. 9. Considering the materials and conduct of the petitioner revealed by the investigation – I am also of the considered view that he is not deserving the benefit of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the interim bail granted earlier vide order dated 06.01.2026 stands vacated and the bail payer of the petitioner for anticipatory bail stands rejected at this stage. 10. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant