Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010091972026 2026:GAU-AS:8205 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/972/2026 ABDUL SIDDAT , S/O MOSPI HUSSAIN, R/O VILL - AMONISHALI BAGARIGURI, NEAR MASJID P.S. - RAHA, DIST - NAGAON, ASSAM 782103 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : S K PODDAR, R MANDAL,MR. R GHOSH,MS. N PODDAR,MR. C SHARMA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER 10-06-2026 Heard Mr. S. K. Poddar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. S. H. Borah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam. 2. This is an application under Section 482 BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of pre- arrest bail to the accused/petitioner, namely, Abdul Siddat who is apprehending Page No.# 2/3 arrest in connection with Raha P.S. Case No. 29/2026 under Sections 318(4)/316(2) of BNS, 2023. 3. Case diary received. Perused the same. 4. It is submitted by Mr. Poddar, learned counsel that after obtaining the order of interim pre-arrest bail on 13.05.2026, the petitioner already appeared before the I.O. and cooperated in the investigation of this case. At the time of taking zimma of the vehicle by his father also, he visited the police station. 5. He further submitted that with some false and concocted alleged the FIR has been lodged against the present petitioner with the allegation that he wanted to sell the vehicle of his father at an amount of Rs.4,50,000/-, though, it is the admitted fact that the vehicle was purchased one year prior to the alleged incident and within one year it cannot be even sold in the price which is less than half of the original value. 6. However, the petitioner is still ready and willing to extend his cooperation in further investigation of this case, if he is granted with the privilege of pre-arrest bail. 7. Ms. Borah, learned APP submitted in this regard that from the materials available in the case diary there are some incriminating materials found against the present petitioner and at the time of agreement it was not within the knowledge of the informant that the vehicle stands in the name of father of the petitioner and suppressing that fact there was an agreement executed between the parties, wherein Rs.4,50,000/- was given by the informant for purchase of the vehicle. However, she submitted that after obtaining the order of interim pre-arrest bail on 13.05.2026, the petitioner already appeared before the I.O. and cooperated in the investigation of the case. Page No.# 3/3 8. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and also considering the materials available in the case diary and other aspects of the case, this Court is of the opinion that custodial interrogation of the petitioner may not be necessary for the purpose of investigation of the case and accordingly, I find it a fit case to extend the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. 9. In view of this, the interim bail granted to the present petitioner vide order dated 13.05.2026 is hereby made absolute on the same terms and conditions. 10. With the above observation and direction, this pre-arrest bail application stands disposed of. 11. Return the case diary herewith. JUDGE Comparing Assistant