Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010140212026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1528/2026 TANUJ SONOWAL S/O RAMESH SONOWAL R/O LEZAI BARUAH GAON,.S. BORBARUAH, DIST. DIBRUGARH, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A AHMED, MR A AHMED,U U KHAN,MISS. P M AHMED,MR. M A CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER Date : 13.07.2026 Heard Mr. A. Ahmed, learned counsel for the accused applicant. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 2. This is an application filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of Page No.# 2/3 pre-arrest bail to the accused applicant Tanuj Sonowal in connection with Barbaruah P.S. Case No.43/2026 under Sections 316(5)/318(4)/336(2)/340(2)/61(2)(a)/3(5) of BNS read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. 3. The case as has been narrated in the FIR dated 26.06.2026 is that serious financial irregularities of suspected misappropriation of government fund by the accused applicant, who was engaged as Computer Assistant of Bogibeel Gaon Panchayat and Dulia Kakoti Gaon Panchayat. The aforesaid allegations of financial irregularities have come to the light during the social audit and subsequent departmental verification records. It was alleged that unauthorized IAY bills were generated in the names of beneficiaries whose IAY houses have already been completed and closed in the year 2017. Accordingly, it was suspected that financial irregularities to the tune of Rs.40 lacs is involved in the instant case. 4. The learned counsel for the accused applicant submits that the FIR has been lodged and the accused applicant has been named as an accused in the FIR without any basis and without any proper verification of the documents and facts. He submits that though the accused applicant was working as Computer Assistant at some point of time, there is no material to suggest that the accused applicant has committed any financial irregularities. He submits while referring to the document dated 04.06.2026, written by one Barnali Yein to the BDO, that since the password of the computers are used and are available with other computer assistants also, it cannot be said as to who had committed the financial irregularities. 5. The learned counsel for the accused applicant further submits that complaints that have been filed by the official of the Gaon Panchayat, are those persons who has verified the application for IAY and there are all possibilities of their involvements in the financial irregularities. He submits that the accused applicant being a government servant, is a responsible person and shall cooperate with the investigation in the case. 6. Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that there are sufficient incriminating materials against the accused applicant and his involvement in the instant case. Page No.# 3/3 7. Case diary in the instant case has been produced before this Court and the same has been perused. 8. Taking into account all the materials available in the case diary and the allegations that have been made in the FIR, this Court is of the considered opinion that this is a fit case wherein, the accused applicant should be granted the privilege of anticipatory bail. 9. Accordingly, it is directed that the accused applicant named above shall be released on pre-arrest bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Barbaruah P.S. Case No.43/2026 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand) with a surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Authority subject to the following conditions:- a) that the accused applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer within a period of 10 (ten) days from the date of passing of the order; b) that the accused applicant shall cooperate with the investigation and shall make himself available as and when called for by the Investigating Authority; c) that the accused applicant shall not try to influence any of the witnesses that may be involved in the present case. 10. With the above observation and direction, the anticipatory bail application stands disposed of as allowed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant