Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010005702026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./96/2026 RIMON MORAN S/O SHRI CHANDRA MORANR/O BORTOL MORAN GOAN,P.OP. AND P.S. MATHURAPUR DIST. CHARAIDEO, ASSAM, PIN-785689 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P D NAIR, MR S R A NASER,MR. H ROHMAN,MR G ALAM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER 02.02.2026 Heard Mr. G.Alam, counsel appearing for the accused applicant. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State. Page No.# 2/4 2. This an application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 granting bail to the accused/applicant, namely, Rimon Moran, in connection with Mathurapur PS Case No. 44/2025 under Section 107 of BNS, 2023. 3. That, one Shri Babu Bharali had lodged an ejahar dated 08/12/2025 in Mathurapur Police Station, inter alia, alleging that for about one year, the applicant was mentally and physically harassing his sister, under the pretext of love and asked some of her nude photographs. It was also alleged that due to the threat of making the said photographs viral on social media, his sister committed suicide on 4.12.2025 by hanging herself in the house. On the basis of the said ejahar, a Mathurapur P.S. Case No. 44/2025 under Section 107 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 was registered and subsequently assigned G.R. No. 315/2025. 4. That, the applicant was arrested on 08.12.2025 and in this connection an Arrest Memo was prepared by the police, inter alia, showing his arrest on 08.12.2025 at 01:35 p.m. in connection with Mathurapur P.S. Case No. 44/2025. Thereafter, he was forwarded to the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Charaideo, Sonari, vide forwarding report dated 08/12/2025. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the accused/applicant submits that while arresting the accused/applicant, the mandate of Section 36 of BNSS was totally flouted by the arresting authority and on that ground only, the arrest being illegal, the accused/applicant should be granted bail. 6. The learned Addl. Public Prosecutor appearing for the State submits that Page No.# 3/4 on perusal of the Case Diary, no signature of any witness is found on the arrest memo. 7. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties, this Court has also perused the Case Diary submitted before this Court. While perusing the arrest Memo made under Section 36 of BNSS, it is seen that there is only the signature of the I.O whereas Section 36 of the BNSS clearly mandates that while arresting the accused- applicant, the officer must prepare a formal record of the arrest, which must be attested by at least one witness, such as a relative or local resident. 8. The law laid down in the case of D.K. Basu, Ashok K. Johri Vs. State of West Bengal, reported in 1997(1) SCC 416 clearly mandates that the police personnel carrying out the arrest and handling the interrogation of the arrestee should bear accurate, visible and clear identification and name tags with their designations. The particulars of all such police personnel who handle interrogation of the arrestee must be recorded in a register and that the police officer carrying out the arrest of the arrestee shall prepare a memo of arrest at the time of arrest and such memo shall be attested by at least one witness. 9. In view of the aforesaid ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court which actually deals with the personal liberty granted under Article 21 and 22(1) of the Constitution of India, this Court is of the considered opinion that there is a violation of the Section 36 of BNSS, which is mandatory in nature, thereby rendering the arrest entitling the applicant to be released on bail. Page No.# 4/4 10. In view of the aforesaid finding, this Court directs that accused/applicant to be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Elaka Magistrate subject to the following condition:- That the accused applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person who may be acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts before the Trial Court in the trial pending against the present accused applicant. 11. In view of the aforesaid finding, the instant bail application stands allowed and disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant