Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010108912026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1169/2026 MEHBUB ALI AND ANR S/O SAMSHER ALI, PERMANENT R/O SIMELIBARI, MANDAKATA, PS BAIHATA CHARIALI, DIST KAMRUP, ASSAM, PIN 781121 2: AZMAL ALI S/O ATOR ALI PERMANENT R/O VILL BHOKELIMARA NIZ RANGAMATI PS MANGALDAI DIST DARRANG ASSAM PIN 78412 -VERSUS- THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. T SOM, MS. A MAHANTA,MR. U HAZARIKA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/4 – B E F O R E – HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN 12-06-2026 Heard Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. T. Som, leaned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the State respondent. This is an application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) praying for granting pre-arrest bail to the petitioners, namely, Mehbub Ali and Azmal Ali, who have been apprehending arrest in connection with Jalukbari Police Station Case No.185/2026 registered under Sections 61(2)/303(2)/317(2)/248/217/240 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Section 13 of the Assam Cattle Preservation Act, 2021. The FIR, in connection of which the petitioners were charged under the aforesaid sections, was lodged on 22.05.2026 and it is revealed by the said FIR that on 21.05.2026, at about 11-30 A.M., an incident was informed that five youths in a Bolero vehicle were robbed of Rs.25,00,000/- while they were coming from Shillong and the said robbery was stated to have been done by two persons coming in a Bolero vehicle, who impersonated themselves as Crime Branch officials. It was also stated in the said FIR that the said money was in connection with hiring charges of excavators engaged in a work site near Umshing. It is thereafter stated in the FIR that pursuant to the said information, an enquiry was conducted and four so called victims were examined and on examination, contradictions appeared in their statements. On further examination, it was found that the amount of Rs.21,85,000/- was the proceeds from illegal cattle smuggling and that a false robbery story was projected by the said victims. It is also stated that apart from that said so called victims, two other individuals Page No.# 3/4 were also involved and further, that the petitioners have hatched the entire conspiracy. It is also stated in the FIR that the petitioners were also present in the Bolero Vehicle where the informants, i.e. the four persons were present and that the petitioners had fled the scene. Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned senior counsel submits the involvement of the petitioners was incorrectly made as they were not there in the Bolero vehicle in question and that the entire story is a cooked-up story. He submits that at best it can be a case of wrong information but the registration of the FIR under the aforesaid sections of law against the petitioners was not correct in the eyes of law. Mr. K.K. Parasar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam submits that from the statements of the co-accused, namely, Asif Ahmed, it is revealed that the entire conspiracy was hatched by the petitioners to misappropriate the entire amount. He also place the statements of the other co-accused, who was initially the informant of the previous information, that the petitioners were involved in the offence. Upon consideration of the submissions made by the parties and on perusal of the FIR, it is not discerned as to why the petitioners were not examined by the informant of the FIR dated 22.05.2026, who is the Inspector of Police of Jalukbari Police Station, when the other four so called victims were examined after they had given the information as stated in the FIR. It was simply stated that the petitioners had left the place after completion of the examination of the four so called victims. Further, the statements placed by the Additional Public Prosecutor are also the statements of the co-accused. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is provided that the petitioners named above, in the event of arrest, shall be released on bail in connection with the aforementioned police station case on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) only each with one local surety each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority subject to the following Page No.# 4/4 conditions:- i) that the petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 10 days, failing which, on and from the 11th day, the pre-arrest bail order shall have no force; ii) that the petitioners shall not hamper and tamper with the evidence of the case; iii) that the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer; and iv) that the petitioners shall cooperate with the investigation of the case as and when required. This anticipatory bail application is disposed of accordingly. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant