Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010063322026 2026:GAU-AS:7618 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/667/2026 MANOJ BHARALI AND ANR SON OF SUNARAM BHARALI RESIDENT OF VILL- KALMOGURI,P.O. AND P.S. GOHPUR,DIST. BISWANATH, ASSAM, PIN- 784178 2: MINU HAZARIKA W/O MANOJ BHARALI RESIDEN TOF VILL-KALMOGURI P.O. AND P.S. GOHPUR DIST. BISWANATH ASSAM PIN-78417 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. T SOM, MS. A MAHANTA,MS. U HAZARIKA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER Date : 01.06.2026 Heard Ms. T. Som, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the accused- Page No.# 2/3 applicants. Also heard Mr. B. Sharma, learned Addl. P.P., representing the State. This is an application filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023, praying for grant of pre-arrest bail to the accused-applicants, apprehending arrest in connection with Gohpur P.S. Case No. 26/2026, registered under Sections 316(2)/318(4)/319(2) of the BNS, 2023. The allegation in the FIR is that the accused-applicants are involved in taking money against promise of jobs. Vide an order dated 16.03.2026, a Coordinate Bench of this Court had already granted interim pre-arrest bail to the accused-applicants with the condition that the accused-applicants shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 7 days from the date of passing of the order and cooperate with the investigation. The learned counsel appearing for the accused-applicants submits that in terms of the aforesaid order dated 16.03.2026, they have appeared before the Investigating Officer and got their statements recorded. However, Mr. B. Sarma, learned Addl. P.P. has submitted that after getting interim relief from this Court, the accused-applicants have been involved in threatening the witnesses in the instant case and due to the aforesaid, two non-FIR cases being 20/26 and 21/26 has been lodged before the Gohpur P.S. against the accused-applicant no. 1 and therefore, he opposes the grant of pre-arrest to the accused-applicants. This Court has heard the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties and on consideration of the fact that the accused- applicants have already appeared before the Investigating Officer and got their statements recorded and their names were not there in the FIR, is of the view that the interim order passed earlier should be made absolute. However, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to approach this Court for cancellation of bail in the event of any threatening or any kind of activities Page No.# 3/3 which is not in terms of law, if committed by the accused-applicants. In terms of the aforesaid direction, the instant anticipatory bail application is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant