Allowed¶32

Shri Bikash Kakati v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC11 Feb 2026AB/299/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Pre-arrest/anticipatory bail; Section 482 BNSS 2023; Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 Ss. 13(1)(e), 13(2), 12; Vigilance P.S. Case No. 04/2026; CM Special Vigilance Cell Assam; disproportionate assets; check period 11.09.2006-31.12.2011; delay of about 10 years in approval for registration of regular case; documents already seized; bail bond Rs.1,00,000 with two local sureties; Gauhati High Court AB/299/2026; Justice Anjan Moni Kalita; order dated 12.02.2026; Bikash Kakati.

What did the court decide?

Conditional pre-arrest (anticipatory) bail granted: release on bail in the event of arrest upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with two local sureties of like nature, subject to appearance before the investigating authority within 7 days, appearance as and when called for, and no tampering with witnesses; the instant AB stands disposed of.

Shri Bikash Kakati Vs the State of Assam — Corruption | Gauhati HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶32

Issue for consideration

Whether pre-arrest (anticipatory) bail should be granted to the accused/applicant in connection with Vigilance P.S. Case No. 04/2026, registered under Sections 13(1)(e), 13(2) and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, alleging acquisition of disproportionate assets.

¶2

Court's answer

Taking into account the whole facts, including the delay of about 10 years caused in seeking approval for registering the regular case and the fact that all necessary documents and papers had already been seized from the accused/applicant, this Court held that at this stage custodial detention of the accused/applicant may not be required.

¶8

Ratio / Principle

In the event of arrest, the accused/applicant Bikash Kakati shall be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with two local sureties of like nature to the satisfaction of the arresting authority, subject to conditions: (i) appearance before the investigating authority within 7 days of the order; (ii) appearance before the investigation as and when called for; and (iii) no hampering or tampering with witnesses.

¶9

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Gauhati High Court (Anjan Moni Kalita, J.), AB/299/2026, order dated 12.02.2026: Anticipatory (pre-arrest) bail allowed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 to a serving Government servant (presently Administrative Officer, Office of the District Commissioner, Election Branch, Kamrup (Metro)) in Vigilance P.S. Case No. 04/2026 under Sections 13(1)(e), 13(2) and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, arising out of a disproportionate-assets enquiry (PE V & AC 02/2015 dt. 28.01.2015; regular enquiry 50(12)/2015; check period 11.09.2006-31.12.2011; approval dt. 22.01.2026). Relying on the about-10-year delay in obtaining approval for registering the regular case and the fact that all necessary documents and papers had already been seized, the Court held custodial detention was not required at this stage and directed release on bail in the event of arrest on a bail bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with two local sureties, subject to conditions (appearance before investigating authority within 7 days; appearance as called; no tampering with witnesses). Application disposed of.

Page No.# 1/5

GAHC010027202026

2026:GAU-AS:2015

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

¶5

Case No. : AB/299/2026

¶6

SHRI BIKASH KAKATI S/O LATE MADHAB CHANDRA KAKATI R/O - NORTH GUWAHATI, DIHING SATRA, ASSAM, PIN- 781030

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE P.P, ASSAM

¶9

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M K DAS, MS Z ANJUM,MS. A LALA,MS N KASHYAP

¶10

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,

¶11

Page No.# 2/5

¶12

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Date : 12.02.2026

¶15

Heard Mr. M.K. Das, learned counsel for the accused/applicant. Also heard Mr. P.K. Dutta, learned Additional Special public prosecutor for CM vigilance.

¶16

This is an application filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 for granting pre-arrest bail to the accused/ applicant in connection with Vigilance P.S. Case No. 04/2026, registered under Sections 13(1)(e)/ 13(2)/ 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

¶17

A preliminary enquiry against accused/applicant was initiated, vide Preliminary Enquiry no. V & AC 02/2015, dated 28.01.2015 alleging disproportionate assets acquired by the accused/ applicant. Thereafter, Govt. of Assam, vide letter dated 13.10.2025 gave consent for regular enquiry. The regular enquiry number bearing No. 50(12)/2015 was initiated on 10.12.2015. For the enquiry the check period was taken as 11.09.2006 to 31.12.2011. During the enquiry, it was found that the accused/ applicant constructed 1^st and 2^nd floor of a house at North Guwahati and there were two deposits amounting to Rs. 5,40,500/- (rupees five lakhs forty thousand five hundred) and 3,00,500/- (rupees three lakhs five hundred) respectively in his account which the accused/ applicant could not explain properly about the source of income.

¶18

During the enquiry, it was also found that accused/applicant had invested in Kisan Vikash Patra amounting to Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten

¶19

Page No.# 3/5

¶20

thousand) and he paid premium for Postal Life Insurance Policy of Rs.18,000/(rupees eighteen thousand), thereby, he paid an amount of Rs. 91,228 for 5 years as premium. It was also found that accused/ applicant had invested and paid Rs. 9,951 as a premium for Bharati Axa Life Insurance Policy and the total amount paid in 2 years came to Rs. 19,800/-. Therefore, on enquiry, it was found that the accused/applicant has ammased those properties beyond his known source of income, i.e. by way of salary as a Govt. servant.

¶21

On 22.01.2026, after the aforesaid enquiry, Political (Vigilance Cell) Department, Dispur accorded approval, vide letter No.E-E-737307/99, dated 22.01.2026 for registering a regular case at Vigilance Police Station, Chief Minister’s Special Vigilance Cell, Assam against the accused/applicant to investigate about the disproportionate source of income about the accused/applicant.

¶22

Mr. M.K. Das, learned counsel for the accused/applicant submits that the accused/applicant is presently working as an Administrative Officer in the Office of the District Commissioner, Election Branch, Kamrup (Metro) and during the check period he was working as L.D. Assistant and posted in North Guwahati. The learned counsel for the accused/applicant further submits that from enquiry which has been narrated in the FIR dated 02.02.2026 only 2 small amounts of i.e., Rs. 5,40,500/- (rupees five lakhs forty thousand five hundred) and 3,00,500/- (rupees three lakhs five hundred) were there in his account and all other allegations regarding certain personal investments made by the accused/ applicant are of small amounts during the period of 2006 to 2011. He further submits that the investigating authority took about 10 years to complete the enquiry which has itself caused immense hardship to

¶23

Page No.# 4/5

¶24

accused/applicant. He further submits that accused/applicant is in service and is going to be superannuated in the next year. He submits that taking into account the aforesaid facts, the accused/applicant should be allowed to go an anticipatory bail at this stage.

¶25

On the other hand Mr. P.K. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for CM Vigilance Cell opposes the bail at this stage without perusal the case diary in the instant case.

¶26

This Court has given careful consideration to the submissions made by counsel appearing for the respective parties and after taking the whole facts in it’s entirety and also taking into account the fact of delay that has been caused in seeking approval for registering a regular case which took about 10 years of time, and also taking into account the fact that all necessary documents and papers have already been seized from the accused/ applicant, this Court is of the considered opinion that at this stage, custodial detention of the accused/applicant may not be required.

¶27

In view of the aforesaid, it is directed that in the event of arrest of the accused/applicant, namely, Bikash Kakati by the investigating authority, the accused applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.1,00,000/-(rupees one lakhs only) with two local sureties of like nature to satisfaction of the arresting authority subject to following conditions:-

¶28

i. That the accused/applicant shall appear before the investigating authority within 7 days of passing of this order.

¶29

ii. That the accused/applicant shall appear before the investigation as and when called for.

¶30

Page No.# 5/5

¶31

iii. That the accused/ applicants shall not try to hamper or tamper with any of the witnesses involved in the instant case in whatsoever manner.

¶32