Allowed¶10

Sijo Potom v. The State of Ap

Gauhati HC5 Apr 2026AB/29/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Sijo Potom v. The State of AP; AB/29/2026; Gauhati High Court (Itanagar Bench); Kardak Ete, J.; order dated 06.04.2026; anticipatory/pre-arrest bail; Section 482 BNSS 2023; Sections 316(3)/318(3) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023; Papu Hills P.S. Case No. 16/2026; FIR by Sanjay Kumar Damai; misappropriation Rs. 29,07,615; COD collections; Loadshare Networks Private Limited; interim bail dated 25.03.2026 made absolute; counter complaint by applicant; application disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Privilege of pre-arrest bail granted to Shri Sijo Potom in connection with Papu Hills P.S. Case No. 16/2026; interim pre-arrest bail of order dated 25.03.2026 made absolute in the same terms and conditions; anticipatory bail application stands disposed of. ¶10

Sijo Potom Vs The State of Ap — Cheating and Forgery | Gauhati HC (2026)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC040004202026

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH)

¶4

Case No. : AB/29/2026

¶5

Sijo Potom

¶6

Son of Late Ngusi Potom, permanent resident of Village Degi Potom, PO and SP Darak, West Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

The State of AP represented by the PP of AP

¶9

Advocate for the Petitioner : Domo Boje, Gojum Nyodu,M Basar,Mebom Jilen

¶10

Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP,

¶11

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE

¶12

ORDER

¶13

Date : 06.04.2026

¶14

Heard Mr. D. Boje, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. T. Ete, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent.

¶15

2. This is an application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of privilege of pre-arrest bail to the accused/applicant, namely, Shri Sijo Potom, in connection with Papu Hills P.S. Case No. 16/2026, under Sections 316(3)/318(3)

¶16

Page No.# 2/3

¶17

of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶18

3. The case emanates from an F.I.R. lodged by one Shri Sanjay Kumar Damai alleging that the accused/applicant, who was engaged as a service provider for handling large product deliveries in Loadshare Networks Private Limited, was entrusted with Cash on Delivery (COD) collections received from customers on behalf of the Company. During the course of such entrustment, the accused/applicant misappropriated an amount of Rs. 29,07,615/- (Rupees twenty nine lakhs seven thousand six hundred fifteen) only which he was required to deposit into the Company’s designated account as per the agreed terms and conditions and despite repeated demands, he failed to remit the same. Accordingly, the aforesaid case has been registered.

¶19

4. Apprehending arrest in the aforesaid case, the present application has been filed.

¶20

5. Mr. D. Boje, learned counsel for the applicant, submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that there exists a dispute between the parties and the applicant has also lodged a counter complaint against the informant. He further submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is ready to cooperate with the investigation. Accordingly, he prays that the accused/applicant may be granted the privilege of pre-arrest bail.

¶21

6. Mr. T. Ete, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, submits that the Case Diary has not been received.

¶22

7. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶23

8. This Court, by an order dated 25.03.2026, had granted interim pre-arrest bail to the accused/applicant with certain conditions.

¶24

Page No.# 3/3

¶25

9. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and also considering that alleged offence appears to have been arisen during the course of employment of the accused as well as the fact that the accused/applicant has been enjoying interim protection pursuant to the order dated 25.03.2026 and there is nothing on record to indicate that he has misused the liberty so granted, this Court is of the considered view that the accused/applicant is entitled to be admitted to the privilege of pre-arrest bail.

¶26

10. Accordingly, the accused/applicant, namely, Shri Sijo Potom, is granted with the privilege of pre-arrest bail in connection with Papu Hills P.S. Case No. 16/2026, under Sections 316(3)/318(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Consequently, the interim bail granted to the accused/applicant vide order dated 25.03.2026 is hereby made absolute in the same terms and conditions.

¶27

11. The anticipatory bail application stands disposed of.

¶28

JUDGE

¶29

Comparing Assistant

Sijo Potom v. The State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sijo Potom v. The State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepak Ranjan Das Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Ekramul Hussain Vs the State of Assam

Ashalata Adhikary Vs the State of Assam and Ors.

Montu Tachiring Vs Ms Reena Siyum

Dr Mohesh Chai Vs Karikho Kri

Likha Rajnik Vs Toko Bapu