Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010056972026 2026:GAU-AS:9652 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/609/2026 MOSTAK ALI SON OF YAKUB ALI, R/O VILLAGE KACHUAGAON, BILASHIPARA, DHUBRI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M A I HUSSAIN, MD A ISLAM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER 15-07-20 26 Heard Mr. M. A. I. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 2. This petition under Section 482 BNSS is filed by the petitioner, namely, Mostak Ali, apprehending arrest in connection with Golaghat P.S. Case No. 28/2026 registered u/s 318(3)/316(3)/351(2)/3(5) of BNS. 3. An FIR dated 3/2/26 was lodged against two accused persons with the allegation that vide sale deed dated 5/8/25 he sold his ultra bus bearing number AS 04 DC 2425 to the accused No. 2, who agreed to pay the installments of the bus. But the accused number 1/the petitioner by violating the agreement sold the bus without informing him and they have also defaulted in paying the installments and they have also not paid the tax on the vehicle. It is further alleged that the GPS of the vehicle has been deactivated and when informant and asked for the vehicle, they abused and threatened him. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel that they had entered into a commercial agreement and that the petitioner has also made payments towards the installments and in support of the same has drawn my attention to the documents annexed indicating payment by UPI to Priyanka Saikia, who is stated to be the wife of the informant. It is further submitted that in the meantime, the zimma of the vehicle have already been given to the informant. 5. The learned Addl. PP on instruction submitted that the investigation has already been completed and the charge sheet has been submitted. Page No.# 3/3 6. Having regard to the nature of allegation and since the investigation is over, there appears to be no necessity of taking the petitioner into custody. 7. Accordingly, the prayer for pre-arrest bail is allowed. 8. The order of interim pre-arrest bail dated 19.03.2026 is hereby made absolute on the same terms and conditions. 9. With the above observations, this pre-arrest bail application is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant