Gauhati High Court
WP(C)/4749/2026 of SHIRAZUL ISLAM Vs THE STATE BANK OF INDIA AND 4 ORS on 6 October 2026
GAHC010184772026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4749/2026 SHIRAZUL ISLAM S/O FAZAL HAQUE, VILL. BAMUN DONGRA, P.O. P.S. MANDIA, DISTRICT BARPETA, ASSAM, PIN-781308 2: HAFIZUR RAHMAN S/O ASAN UDDIN VILL. PAZARBHANGA
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010184772026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/4749/2026
SHIRAZUL ISLAM
S/O FAZAL HAQUE, VILL. BAMUN DONGRA, P.O. P.S. MANDIA, DISTRICT
BARPETA, ASSAM, PIN-781308
2: HAFIZUR RAHMAN
S/O ASAN UDDIN
VILL. PAZARBHANGA
P.O. BARGHOL
P.S. BARGHOL
DISTRICT BARPETA
ASSAM
PIN-781302
VERSUS
THE STATE BANK OF INDIA AND 4 ORS
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, HAVING ITS CENTRAL OFFICE AT
STATE BANK OF INDIA BHAVAN, MADAM CAMA ROAD, MUMBAI-400021.
2:THE ZONAL MANAGER
STATE BANK OF INDIA
ZONAL OFFICE
BHANGAGARH
GUWAHATI-781006.
3:THE UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS
NORTH BLOCK
NEW DELHI- 110001
4:THE INDIAN CYBER CRIME COORDINATION CENTRE
14C 5TH FLOOR
NDCC II BUILDING
Page No.# 2/2
JAI SINGH ROAD
NEW DELHI- 110001
5:THE BRANCH MANAGER
STATE BANK OF INDIA
BAHARI BAZAR BRANCH
DISTRICT BARPETA
ASSAM- 78130
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M ALI, MR. J UDDIN
Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., MR. B SHARMA(C.G.C.)R3,S DAS(R1,2,5),MS. A
SAHA(R1,2,5),MS S DEY(R1,2,5),MR. K K NANDI(R1,2,5)
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
07.10.2026
Mr. M. Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he has received instructions from the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition with liberty. In view of the above submission made by Mr. Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner, the writ petition is dismissed on withdrawal, with liberty, as sought for.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant