Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010145502026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2082/2026 AMIT DEBNATH SON OF LT. CHINU DEBNATH, RESIDENT OF BOGRIGURI, P.S. FAKIRAGRAM, IN THE DISTRICT OF KOKRAJHAR, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M A MONDAL, MR. A ISLAM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 29.07.2026 Heard Mr. M.A. Mondal, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. D.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. By this application, the petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Fakigram P.S. Case No. 26/2026 registered under Sections 305(A)/324(4) of the Page No.# 2/3 BNS, 2023 along with Section 317(4) of the BNS. The FIR dated 29.06.2026 on the basis of which the petitioner was arrayed as an accused person and was arrested was lodged by an officials of Assam Gramin Bank, Chithila Branch wherein it was inter alia stated that few unknown miscreants entered the said bank through the back door and the said miscreants tried to break cash vault but was unable to do so but they removed some documents and had also broke two numbers of godrej lock. It is also stated that the CCTV camera was found missing inside the said bank. The police on receipt of the ejahar investigated and during the investigation, they arrested the petitioner along with others on suspicion of their involvement in the said offence. The police in the forwarding report had stated that the vehicle was used during commission of the offence and that the vehicle was owned by one Rakesh Choudhury. It is also stated in the said report that there are other persons involved in the crime and that the petitioner is one of them and as such he was arrested. 3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was arrested only on suspicion and that no concrete materials were found against him. 4. Mr. D.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State submits that the petitioner was suspected of having committed the crime along with others and that the Case Diary would reveal the entire gamut of the case. 5. Upon consideration of the submissions made by the learned Counsels and on perusal of the forwarding report, it is seen that the petitioner was arrested only on the basis of suspicion and that it is stated that further investigation is in progress. It is further seen that the petitioner has been inside the jail for almost Page No.# 3/3 a month and that his interrogation is over and as such, this Court finds it fit to enlarge the petitioner on bail on furnishing of bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of CJM, Kokrajhar under the following conditions: i) the petitioner will appear before the Investigating Officer as and when call for. ii) the petitioners will not hamper, tamper with the evidence, neither influence the witnesses connected with the case. iii) the petitioners will not leave the place of jurisdiction without the permission of the said Court i.e. CJM, Kokrajhar. 6. Petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant