AB/62/2026 of Santanu Choudhury and Anr Vs The State of AP on 16 August 2026

ORDER

17.08.2026

Heard Mr. A. R. Baruah, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Ms. T. Jini, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent.

2. By order dated 17.06.2026, while issuing notice, this Court, in the interim, directed that, in the event of arrest of the accused/applicant in connection with Chimphu P.S. Case No. 73/2025, he shall be released on interim anticipatory bail on execution of a bail bond of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only). The applicant was further directed to appear before the investigating officer of the case and cooperate with the investigation.

3. In compliance with the said direction, Mr. Baruah, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the accused/applicant appeared before the Investigating Officer of the case and his statement was recorded. Upon such appearance, the accused/applicant was formally arrested on 12.08.2026, in connection with the aforesaid police station case, and after completion of necessary formalities, was subsequently released on bail on execution of a bail bond in terms of the interim anticipatory bail order dated 17.06.2026.

4. It is further submitted that since the accused/applicant has been cooperating with the Investigating Officer and has already been arrested and subsequently released on interim pre-arrest bail, pursuant to the interim protection granted by this Court, the interim bail granted to him on 17.06.2026 may be made absolute.

5. Ms. Jini, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent has produced the case diary and submits, that after obtaining interim pre-arrest bail, the accused/applicant has been cooperating with the investigation of the case. She further submits that his statement has already been recorded and he was formally arrested and subsequently released on bail in terms of the order dated 17.06.2026 passed by this Court. She, therefore, submits that, further custodial interrogation of the accused/applicant is not required.

6. I have considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and have also perused the case diary.

7. In view of the above facts and circumstances, particularly the fact that the accused applicant has appeared before the I.O, his statement has been recorded, and he has already been arrested and released on bail pursuant to the interim protection granted by this court, this court is of the view that the further custodial interrogation of the accused/applicant is not presently required. The interim protection granted to the accused/applicant, therefore, deserved to be made absolute.

8. Accordingly, the interim anticipatory bail granted to the accused/applicant vide order dated 17.06.2026 is hereby made absolute, subject to the following terms and conditions:

i. that the accused/applicant shall continue cooperating with the Investigating Officer/police officer and appear before the Trial Court as and when required;

ii. that the accused/applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing those facts to the Court or to any police officer;

iii. that the accused/applicant shall not hamper or tamper with the evidences and the witnesses of the case; and

iv. that the accused/applicant shall furnish his phone number to the investigating officer.

9. In terms of above, this anticipatory bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE

Sabnam Mepo (SPA)