ORDER

Date : 13.12.2024 Heard Mr. B. K. Mahajan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent.

2. This is an application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of bail to the accused/petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with ACB P.S. Case No. 81/2024, under Section 7(a) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

3. Case Diary has been received. Perused the same. Heard both sides.

4. It is submitted by Mr. Mahajan, learned counsel for the petitioner, that it was a trapped case wherein the present accused/petitioner got arrested in connection with this case and though as per the allegation, there was a demand of Rs. 20,000/-, but only Rs. 5,000 was found from the possession of the accused/petitioner when he was apprehended in connection with this case. He further submitted that after his arrest, the accused/petitioner was on 5 (five) days police remand and during that period, every formalities like taking voice samples and sending the same to FSL for examination was done and the petitioner was also thoroughly interrogated at the time of his police remand which otherwise reflects from the Forwarding Report of the accused/petitioner while he was forwarded for judicial custody after 5 (five) days of police remand.

Accordingly, he submitted that most part of the investigation has already been completed and hence, he submitted that the present accused/petitioner may be released on bail. However, he is still ready and willing to co-operate the I.O. in further investigation of this case if he is granted with the privilege of bail.

5. Mr. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, has submitted in this regard that it is a trapped case and most of the formalities were already been observed by the investigating agency during the time of investigation including the collection of voice samples of the accused/petitioner and there is sufficient progress in the investigation. Further he submitted that from the Case Diary, it is seen that there may not be any other person involved in this case as it is a trapped case and the allegation was only against the present accused/petitioner. However he submitted that there are sufficient incriminating materials collected by the I.O. during investigation of the case and accordingly he raised objection in allowing the accused/petitioner on bail.

6. After hearing the submissions made by the learned counsels for both sides, I have also perused the case record and the Case Diary. It is a fact that the petitioner was on police remand for 5 (five) days and from the Forwarding Report, it reveals that the present accused/petitioner was thoroughly interrogated during his police remand before sending for judicial custody. It further reveals that the voice samples of the accused/petitioner has already been collected during the investigation cum the police remand which has already been sent to FSL for examination. More so, from the materials available in the Case Diary, it is seen that there is sufficient progress in the investigation of the case as most of the investigation has already been completed and other formalities were also observed during the police remand of the present accused/petitioner.

7. In view of above and also considering all aspects of the case, I am of the view that further custodial interrogation of the present accused/petitioner is not necessary here in this case.

8. Accordingly, it is provided that on furnishing a bond of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) only with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, Guwahati, the accused/petitioner, namely, Khurshed Ali, be enlarged on bail, subject to the following conditions:

(i) that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required;

(ii) that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted