Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010089392026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/939/2026 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. T BURAGOHAIN,MR B PAUL Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER Date : 04-06-2026 Heard Mr. D.P. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K Das, learned Addl. P.P appearing for the State. 2. Invoking the provisions of Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the petitioner namely, Md. Abu Hanifa seeking anticipatory bail Page No.# 2/3 in connection with Murajhar P.S Case No. 252/2025 dated 03.12.2025 u/s 61(2)/336(3)/340(1)/340(2) BNS. 3. The earlier bail petition was rejected on 02.02.2026. 4. Mr. K.K Das, learned Additional PP submits that, as directed by order dated 03.06.2026, he took instructions from the concerned Investigating Officer and it came to be known that the certificate purportedly belonging to the petitioner of Delhi State Open School has been sent to the said organization for verification and that the investigation is pending for the same and that, after receipt of the verification report, perhaps final form can be submitted. 5. Mr. Das, the learned Additional PP, however, objects to this subsequent bail petition as well as due to the existence of incriminating material. 6. In the earlier bail petition, where the petitioner was granted interim initially, but the bail petition came to be rejected subsequently - that he was examined by the Police and his statements have been recorded. In the intervening period, since the date of last rejection, since 02.02.2026, the Police have not proceeded to arrest the petitioner as well as in which case, obviously the question of filing this instant bail application would not have arisen. 7. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am of the considered view that granting of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner at this stage may not prejudice the remaining investigation. 8. Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest of the accused/petitioner, named above, in connection with the above mentioned case, he shall be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority and subject to the condition that; he shall cooperate with the remaining Page No.# 3/3 investigation; he shall be available for trial if one commences; he shall not hamper or tamper with evidence. 9. The bail petition stands disposed of. 10. Return the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant