New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday stayed the operation of the Gauhati High Court's order which had cancelled the regular bail granted to Arunachal Pradesh IAS officer Talo Potom. The officer is an accused in the high-profile case involving the suicide of 19-year-old Gomchu Yekar.

The Bench, comprising Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar, passed the interim order after hearing Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra, appearing for Potom. While protecting the officer from immediate re-arrest, the Court directed him to strictly cooperate with the ongoing investigation.

The case stems from the tragic death of Gomchu Yekar, who was found dead at his rented accommodation in Lekhi village on October 23, 2025. The incident sent shockwaves across the state after the deceased reportedly left behind suicide notes containing explosive allegations.

The notes allegedly accused the involved persons of "systematic mental harassment, sexual exploitation, corruption-related activities, and exposure to HIV/AIDS." Following the discovery, Talo Potom was arrested on October 27, 2025.

The legal battle over Potom's liberty has seen sharp turns across the judicial hierarchy:

Sessions Court (Granted Bail): In a move that raised eyebrows, the Sessions Court granted Potom bail on November 4, 2025, just seven days after his arrest.
High Court (Cancelled Bail): The victim's father challenged this release. The Gauhati High Court subsequently cancelled the bail, observing that the Sessions Court had conducted a "mini-trial" and ignored the prima facie material—including the suicide note naming the officer. The High Court had noted that releasing an "influential person" at such a nascent stage could derail the probe, especially since electronic evidence (deleted WhatsApp chats) was still being recovered.
Supreme Court (Stays Cancellation): Aggrieved by the High Court's direction to surrender forthwith, Potom approached the Apex Court, which has now paused the cancellation order.

This case highlights the delicate balance courts must maintain between personal liberty and the integrity of an investigation involving powerful state functionaries. While the Supreme Court has granted interim protection, the spotlight remains on the serious nature of the allegations—involving exploitation and abetment—and whether the investigation can proceed impartially with the accused out on bail.