Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010104382026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1123/2026 ROSHIDUL HAQUE ALIAS ROSDUL UL HAQUE, S/O- AKBAR ALI,VILL- JAHAJAN, P.O- SUTIRPAR P.S-JURIA DIST- NAGAON, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M ALI, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER 01.06.2026 Heard Mr. M. Ali, the learned counsel appearing for the accused/applicant. Also heard Mr. B. Sarmah, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Page No.# 2/5 2. This is an application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of pre-arrest bail to the accused/petitioner, namely, Roshidul Haque @ Rosdul Ul Haque in connection with P.S. Cyber Crime (Rohtak, Haryana) Case No.26/2026 registered under Sections 318(4)/336(3)/338/340(2)/61(2) of BNS, 2023. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the accused/applicant submits that the accused/applicant is a daily wage labourer and his father has received a notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS dated 10.05.2026 issued by the Police Officer of the Police Station Cyber Crime, Rohtak, Haryana in connection with P.S. Cyber Crime, (Rohtak, Haryana) Case No.26/2026 under Sections 318(4)/336(3)/338/340(2)/61(2) of BNS, 2023 whereby the accused/applicant had been asked to appear on 18.05.2026 at 11:00 A.M. at Police Station, Rohtak. He submits that since the accused/applicant was working in Tezpur and he was not present when the notice was received by his father, he could not appear before the Police Station Cyber Crime, Rohtak, Haryana on 18.05.2026 as he got to know about the notice only on 18.05.2026. Since the accused/applicant has received the notice and he is seriously apprehending his arrest, he has filed this instant application for transit anticipatory bail so that he can approach to the concerned jurisdictional Court and file the necessary anticipatory bail before the jurisdictional Court. The learned counsel for the accused/applicant submits that the accused/applicant is not aware of any allegations Page No.# 3/5 that have been made in the FIR or whether his name has been included in the FIR or not, but he submits that from the notice it transpires that he has been requested by the aforesaid Police Station, Rohtak for investigation in the matter. 4. Mr. B. Sarmah, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State submits that transit anticipatory bail can be granted only for a limited period of time only to facilitate the accused/applicant to do the needful for getting the appropriate anticipatory bail from the jurisdictional Court. 5. Taking into account the settled law as has been laid down in the case of Teesta Atul Setalvad and Another vs. State of Maharashtra and Others by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in connection with Anticipatory Bail Application No. 14 of 2014 decided on 31.01.2014, this Court is of the considered opinion that transit bail can be granted in respect of a case registered under the jurisdiction of another High Court in exercise of powers under Section 438 Cr.P.C. (corresponding to Section 482 of the BNSS). 6. The aforesaid principle has also been approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in various cases. In the aforesaid case of Teesta Atul Setalvad (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed as follows:- "The matter relates to grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Bombay High Court vide impugned order dated 31st January, 2014 allowed the petitioners to move before the Page No.# 4/5 appropriate Court in Gujarat for seeking relief and granted Transit Bail for four weeks so as to enable the petitioner to approach before the appropriate Court at Gujarat. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. However, taking into consideration the nature of the case and submission made on behalf of the petitioners, we extend the Transit Bail in favour of petitioners up to 31st March, 2014 so as to enable the petitioners to approach the appropriate Court in Gujarat. If such petition is filed, the appropriate Court in Gujarat will consider the same independently without being influenced by any observation made by the Bombay High Court. The question of law about jurisdiction of High Court is kept open. The Special Leave Petition stands disposed of.” 7. In view of the aforesaid discussions and observations of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, this Court is of the considered opinion that a relief of interim bail under Section 482 of BNSS can be granted to the accused/applicant with a direction to the accused/applicant to go before the appropriate Court having jurisdiction for seeking appropriate relief. 8. Accordingly, it is directed that, in the interim, in the event of arrest of the accused/applicant in connection with P.S. Cyber Crime (Rohtak, Haryana) Case No.26/2026, the accused/applicant shall be released on transit bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) only with a surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority. Page No.# 5/5 9. However, it is made clear that this protection is granted only for 10(ten) days from the date of passing of this order, i.e. upto 11.06.2026 so as to enable the accused/applicant to approach the Competent Court for appropriate relief. 10. In terms of the aforesaid, the instant bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant