Gauhati High Court
Bail Appln./2438/2026 of GOURAB CHUTIA Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM on 24 August 2026
GAHC010180402026 2026:GAU-AS:12185 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2438/2026 GOURAB CHUTIA S/O KAMA CHUTIA RESIDENT OF BORGAON, PS BAREKURI, DIST TINSUKIA, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE P.P., ASSAM.
GAHC010180402026
2026:GAU-AS:12185
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./2438/2026
GOURAB CHUTIA
S/O KAMA CHUTIA RESIDENT OF BORGAON, PS BAREKURI, DIST
TINSUKIA, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE P.P., ASSAM.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR A HAWARI, MR. R ISLAM
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Date : 25-08-2026 Heard Mr. A. Hawari, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. MP Goswami, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This is an application under section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 praying for regular bail of the petitioner who was arrested on
07.07.2026 in connection with Tinsikia Police Station Case No. 156/2026, under Section 303(2)/305(c)/317(4)/61(2)112(2)/3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Read with Section 3(2)(b) of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, read with Section 15(2)/15(4) of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of user in Land) Amendment Act, 2011.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the FIR and to the orders passed by the learned Remand Magistrate, wherein it is reflected that the petitioner is the Security Guard of the parking lot where some condensate oil has been loaded into a night super bus.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been behind bars for 50 days. As per the forwarding report, there are also other persons involved, and the petitioner, being the Security Guard of the Parking Lot, has assisted in the loading of the material into the bus. Accordingly, the petitioner would participate in the investigation and would co- operate with the same if granted the privilege of bail by this Court.
5. The learned Addl. Public Prosecutor has submitted that the petitioner’s involvement is obvious and bail at this point of time may not serve the interests of the investigation.
6. I have gone through the materials on record, and I have found that a custodial interrogation of the petitioner for 50 days need not be taken further in the event the petitioner participates in the investigation process.
7. Accordingly, the petitioner shall be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned CJM, Tinsukia.
8. The learned CJM shall be at liberty to impose such conditions as may be deemed necessary to ensure participation of the petitioner in the ongoing investigation process.
9. The petitioner will not leave the jurisdiction of the Investigating Officer or the learned CJM without prior information.
10. Bail petition is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant