[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Gauhati High Court
Dipankar Choudhury vs The State Of Assam on 7 February, 2026
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010004022026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/50/2026
DIPANKAR CHOUDHURY
SON OF SHARAT CHOUDHURY
RESIDENT OF VILL- BORMURIKONA VTC NO. 1 NATHKUCHI,P.OP.
NATHKUCHIP.S. DOBOKA
SUB- DIST. TIHU, DIST. NALBARI, ASSAM, PIN-781355
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REP BY THE PP, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. T N DAS, MS PURABI DEKA,MS JUTISMITA DAS,MR
KRISHNANGSHU B
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS
ORDER
Date : 07.02.2026
Heard Ms. J. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr.
M.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. By this application filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 the
Page No.# 2/3
petitioner, viz., Dipankar Choudhury, has prayed for pre-arrest bail in
connection with Patacharkuchi Police Station Case No.230/2025 registered
under Sections 303(2)/317(4) of BNS, 2023 r/w Section 40/41 of Assam
Forest Regulation, 1891.
3. The gist of the accusation in this case is that on 13.12.2025. one
Bonojit Das had lodged an FIR before the Patacharkuchi Police Station,
inter alia, alleging that on 13.12.2025, one excavator was found excavating
soil and mining red sand without valid mining permit and documents for
excavation in the forest land.
4. The petitioner was granted interim bail on 09-01-2026 with
conditions, pursuant to which he is stated to have appeared before the I/O
for recording his and the same is confirmed by the Additional Public
Prosecutor, who has also received the case diary.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner drawing attention to the
annexed documents, summits that the petitioner has obtained permission
dated 30-10-2025 from the Director, Geology and Mining, Government of
Assam. It is also submitted that relevant permission from fire and
emergency services, as well as environmental impact assessment approval
has also been given to the petitioner.
6. However, the prosecution submits that he has not got relevant
permission from the forest department and in the report of the DFO, it is
contended that, no permit has been issued to the petitioner for extraction
of minor minerals from Kuara area on Kaldia river, nor any Government
royalty deposited by him. It is also contended that another criminal
Page No.# 3/3
proceeding has been initiated against the petitioner.
7. Nevertheless, while the investigation proceeds to determine whether
the petitioner should be sent up for trial for any criminal offence, it may not
be necessary to cancel the interim bail and I am of the considered view
that, as his statement has also been recorded, pursuant to grant of interim,
allowing the bail petition may not prejudice the investigation.
8. In such view of the matter, the interim bail vide order dated
09.01.2026 is hereby made absolute, subject to the conditions - that the
petitioner shall continue cooperating with the investigation (ii) he shall not
hamper or tamper with evidence (iii) he shall not commit any illegal
activities or offences or any activities violative of the forest laws and
regulations.
9. Violation or breach of condition(s) shall entail cancellation of the
bail.
10. The petition stands disposed of accordingly.
11. Send back the case diary.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
