Nachima Aktara Vs the State of Assam

2. This is an application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of pre-arrest bail in connection with CID PS Case No. 15/2025 under Section 61(2), 318(4), 336(3)/340(2) of BNS, 2023.

¶16

3. An FIR was lodged by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, CID, Assam on 31.07.2025 before the Officer-in-Charge, CID, Police Station stating that information has been received from a reliable source that during the recruitment process for Graduate and Post-Graduate teachers under the Education Department, more than 50 candidates have submitted Pass Certificates allegedly issued by Techno Global University, Madhya Pradesh, which are fake.

¶17

4. The petitioner was a candidate in the aforesaid recruitment process and had also submitted a B.Ed. Pass Certificate issued by said Techno Global University, Madhya Pradesh and hence, apprehending arrest has preferred the instant pre-arrest bail application.

¶18

5. The petitioner has asserted in the instant pre-arrest bail application, that Techno Global University, Madhya Pradesh is a recognized university for

¶19

Page No.# 3/5

¶20

pursuing B.Ed examination and has been granted recognition by the NCTE, enabling it to carry out B.Ed Training Course. Accordingly, the petitioner has pursued the B.Ed course and completed the same from the said University and his Certificate is a valid one.

¶21

6. The CD as called for has been received and learned Addl Public Prosecutor has drawn the attention of the this Court to the Report dated 29.08.2025 submitted to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, CID, Assam jointly by the Registrar as well as Controller of Techno Global University, Madhya Pradesh in response to the query of the Investigating Officer, stating that the petitioner had never enrolled himself as a student of the said University and hence, the certificate submitted by him is a fake and forged one.

¶22

7. From the above, it prima facie appears that the petitioner has sought to mislead the Court by asserting that he had undergone the B.Ed Course from the aforesaid Techno Global University, Madhya Pradesh.

¶23

8. It is further submitted that pursuant to interim order passed by this Court, the petitioner has appeared before the I.O and has co-operated with the investigation. On the other hand, the I.O in his bail objection has stated that several candidates in their statements have specifically mentioned few link men and facilitators who supplied them with course documents in exchange for money and in order to ascertain the larger nexus and identify other beneficiaries and to secure further evidence and as network level investigation is still ongoing, the active interrogation of the petitioner is very much required. The Addl. Public Prosecutor has also stated that the petitioner if allowed to go on

¶24

Page No.# 4/5

¶25

pre-arrest bail may disrupt the ongoing investigation by influencing other key witnesses.

¶26

9. Learning counsel for the petitioner submitted that all the offences mentioned in the FIR are punishable by imprisonment up to 7 years and the I.O could very well have proceeded under Section 35 BNSS, 2023 and issued notice to the petitioner for his appearance as laid down in Arnish Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and Another reported in (2014) 8 SCC 270 .

¶27

10. That in my view is a different aspect of the matter as we are concerned with whether the petitioner is entitled to the privilege of pre-arrest bail, the offences involved being non-bailable.

¶28

11. The remedy available to the petitioner for violation of Section 35 BNSS, 2023 and the directions of the Supreme Court in Arnish Kumar (Supra) if any, cannot be availed of in the pre-arrest bail application.

¶29

12. Having regard to the above, the necessity of custodial interrogation cannot be ruled out. Consequently, the prayer for pre-arrest bail stands rejected.

¶30

13. The order of interim bail stands vacated.

¶31

14. Send back the Case Diary.

¶32

JUDGE

¶33

Page No.# 5/5

¶34

Comparing Assistant

Nachima Aktara v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nachima Aktara v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

MD Moinul Hoque Alias Moynul Hoque Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Musstt. Fatema Khatun Vs Md. Inamul Islam and 2 Ors.

Mokbul Hussain, Vs the State of Assam

Pinku Kalita Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Mustaquim Billah Vs the State of Assam

Mofiz Uddin Ahmed Vs the State of Assam