Bail Appln./3211/2026 of MANDEEP CHANGMAI @ MONDIP CHANGMAI Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM on 7 October 2026

ORDER

08.10.2026

Heard Mr. S. Das, learned counsel for the accused and Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. This application, under Section 483 of the BNSS, is preferred by the accused, namely, Mandeep Changmai @ Mondip Changmai, who has been languishing in jail hajot since 11.08.2026, in connection with Khowang PS Case No. 15/2026, under Sections 147/148/308(2)/61(2) of the BNS, read with Sections 10/13 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, for grant of bail.

3. It is to be noted here that the aforementioned case has been registered on the basis of one FIR lodged by one SI Susanta Protim Boruah of Khowang Police Station, on 18.06.2026.

3.1. The essence of allegation made in the FIR, dated 18.06.2026, is that on 07.06.2026, an information was received at Khowang Police Station that one Sri Lambit Gogoi has been missing. Accordingly, an enquiry was initiated and during the course of the enquiry, the Call Detail Records (CDR) of the missing person, bearing mobile number 6002009901, were obtained and analyzed. In the meantime, another person, namely Sri Probin Sonowal, of Tinthengia, Khowang, reported at Police Station that he had received extortion calls, allegedly from ULFA (I) using mobile number 9612068032. The CDR of the said mobile number was also obtained for analysis and during analysis, it has been found that the IMEI number of the mobile handset belonging to the missing person was being used with mobile number 9612068032. Upon further examination, it was ascertained that the mobile phone of the missing person, Sri Lambit Gogoi, was being used by present accused, namely, Partha Protim Boruah. During interrogation, the accused admitted that he is in close contact with Sri Abhilekh Borah @ Anurag Axom, of ULFA(I) and under his supervision and instruction, Sri Lambit Gogoi was recruited and facilitated to a ULFA (I) camp. It was further revealed that the accused, along with others, used the mobile phone of Sri Lambit Gogoi to make extortion calls in the name of ULFA (I). The accused person also facilitated WhatsApp login from the number 9612068032, to enable extortion calls to be made by Abhilekh Borah @ Anurag Axom.

4. Mr. Das, learned counsel for the accused, submits that the accused was arrested on 11.08.2026 and since then, he has been languishing in jail hazot for almost two months. He further submits that the present accused is innocent and no way involved with the offence alleged in the FIR and that three of the co- accused have already been enlarged on bail by this Court and also by a Coordinate Bench of this Court. He also submits that the present accused is ready to cooperate with the investigating agency and therefore, he has contended to allow the petition.

5. Per-contra, Mr. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, has produced the case diary before this Court and submits that the IO has collected sufficient incriminating materials against the accused and investigation is still going on and if the accused is enlarged on bail, at this stage, it will hamper the investigation. He also submits that the present accused has facilitated in the activation and operational use of SIM cards used for making extortion calls in the name of the banded terrorist organization ULFA (I) and that statement of the co-accused also reveals his complicity with the offence alleged in the and therefore, Mr. Borthakur has contended to dismiss the petition.

6. Having heard the submissions of learned Advocates of both sides, this Court has carefully gone through the petition as well as the documents placed on record and also perused the case diary with the assistance of learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

7. It appears that the accused was arrested on 11.08.2026, and since then he has been languishing in jail hazot for almost two months. Further, it appears that some of the co-accused have already been enlarged on bail by this Court and also by a Coordinate Bench of this Court. It also appears that the investigation, qua the present accused, appears to be almost completed.

8. Having considered above and also considering the period of detention and also the role played by the present accused in commission of the offence, this Court is of the view that his further custodial detention may not be warranted in the interest of investigation.

9. Accordingly, it is provided that on furnishing a bond of Rs. 50,000/- each only, with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dibrugarh, the accused be enlarged on bail.

10. In terms of above, this bail application stands disposed of.

11. The case diary be returned.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant