Gauhati High Court
AB/1659/2026 of MANOJ TALUKDAR Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM on 5 August 2026
GAHC010150902026 2026:GAU-AS:10915 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1659/2026 MANOJ TALUKDAR SON OF BASANTA TALUKDAR, RESIDENT OF WARD NO. 3, DIPTI NAGAR, P.S. RANGIA, DISTRICT KAMRUP, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED
GAHC010150902026
2026:GAU-AS:10915
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/1659/2026
MANOJ TALUKDAR
SON OF BASANTA TALUKDAR, RESIDENT OF WARD NO. 3, DIPTI NAGAR, P.S. RANGIA, DISTRICT KAMRUP, ASSAM.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A CHAUDHURY, MR. D BORA,MR. N MAHAJAN,MR. P K
DAS
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI
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
06.08.2026
1. Heard Mr. D. Bora, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the State.
2. This is an application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, namely, Manoj
Talukdar, who is apprehending arrest in connection with Dhekiajuli Police Station Case No.
199/2026 registered
under
Sections 290/318(3)/316(2)/324(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. The case of the prosecution is that due to a reservoir collapsing at Dhekiajuli Town of which the petitioner was the project contractor wherein, substantial damage has been caused to the public property upon a case being filed and registered, the petitioner is apprehending that he shall be arrested in connection with the said case.
4. The Case Diary as called for is placed before this court.
5. Upon hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties and having perused the materials available on record, it appears that custodial interrogation of the petitioner at this stage is not necessary.
6. Therefore, this court is inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, it is provided that in the event of the arrest, the petitioner, named above, shall be released on pre-arrest bail in connection with the above noted case, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 15,000/- (rupees fifteen thousand), with one surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the arresting authority, subject of course to the following conditions, that the petitioner shall:
(i) Shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 10 days from today, failing which on and from the 11th day, the pre- arrest bail order shall have no force.
(ii) Shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case so as to dissuade such persons from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
(iii) Shall refrain from such activities with which he is alleged, failing which, this bail order shall stand cancelled.
8. It is needless to be clarified that non-compliance of any of the aforesaid conditions shall render the pre-arrest bail granted by this order cancelled.
9. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail stands disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant