Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010065592026 2026:GAU-AS:8631 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/708/2026 MD NOOR ALAM ALIAS NOOR ALOM S/O ABU SAYED, R/O VILL THAKURANBAI, PO AND PS MANKACHAR, DIST SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR, ASSAM, PIN 783131 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M R KHANDAKAR, MR. A ROHMAN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA O R D E R Date : 16.06.2026. Heard Mr. M.R. Khandakar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, the learned Addl. P.P., Assam appearing on behalf of the State respondent. This is an application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of pre- Page No.# 2/3 arrest bail to the accused/petitioner, namely, Md. Noor Alam @ Noor Alom, who is apprehending arrest in connection with the Mankachar P.S. Case No. 74/2025 (corresponding to G.R. No.150/25), registered under Sections 420/468/465/471/34 69 of the IPC. The case diary is received and perused the same. It is submitted by Mr. Khandakar, the learned counsel that the present accused petitioner that after obtaining the order of interim pre-arrest bail dated 02.04.2026, the present accused petitioner appeared before the I.O. and extended his cooperation with the investigation of this case. He further submitted that the present petitioner is an insurance agent and under his bona fide mistake, he wrongly reflected the vehicle in question as a two wheeler vehicle instead of Bolero Pick-up van, though the registration number and other particulars were the same. However, the petitioner is still ready and willing to extend his cooperation in further investigation of this case if needed. Mr. Parasar, learned Addl. P.P., Assam submitted in this regard that the mistake was find out at the time of filing the MAC Case, wherein the said Bolero Pick-up van was alleged to have been involved in the accident. However, the accused petitioner has already appeared before the I.O. and extended his cooperation. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides and other aspects of the case vis-à-vis the materials available in the case diary and the fact that the accused petitioner had already extended his cooperation, this Court is of the opinion that custodial interrogation may not be necessary for the interest of investigation. Page No.# 3/3 In view of this, the order of interim pre-arrest bail granted to the accused petitioner on 02.04.2026, is hereby made absolute in the same terms and conditions. With the above observation, the present bail petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant