Gauhati High Court
Bail Appln./2458/2026 of FAKRUL ISLAM Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM on 28 September 2026
GAHC010180332026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2458/2026 FAKRUL ISLAM S/O LATE HAMED ALI RESIDENT OF NO.1 KAKI, NO.7 GOAN, P.S - KAKI, DIST - HOJAI , ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP,
GAHC010180332026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./2458/2026
FAKRUL ISLAM
S/O LATE HAMED ALI
RESIDENT OF NO.1 KAKI, NO.7 GOAN, P.S - KAKI, DIST - HOJAI , ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MD S ALI, MD G HUSSAIN,MR M RAHMAN
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI
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
Date : 29.09.2026
Heard Mr. S. Ali, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. K. Parashar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State respondent.
2. By way of this second bail application, the petitioner, namely, Fakrul Islam, is seeking the privilege of bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, who was arrested on 30.06.2026 in connection with Kaki P.S. Case No. 93/2023 under Section 366/370/34 of the IPC.
3. It is pertinent to mention that the first bail application filed by the petitioner, i.e., Bail Appln./2075/2026, was rejected by this Court vide order dated 07.08.2026.
4. The brief facts of the case is that on 18.09.2023, the informant lodged an F.I.R. at Kaki P.S., alleging, inter alia, that 9 years prior thereto, her daughter had married one person and out of the said wedlock, they have two children, a boy aged about 8 years and a girl aged about 5 years. It is alleged that the informant’s daughter had gone to Kerala in search of employment in companies and, thereafter, the accused person took her on the pretext of providing her with opportunities to work in companies. However, instead of providing her employment, the accused person allegedly subjected her to human trafficking. According, the case was registered and investigation was taken up.
5. Mr. S. Ali, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner has been languishing in judicial custody for the last 92 days, and despite lapse of 90 days, the charge-sheet has not been filed till date. It is accordingly submitted that the petitioner has acquired an indefeasible right to be released on bail by virtue of the proviso to Section 187(3) of the BNSS.
6. Mr. K. K. Parashar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, submits that the charge-sheet could not be submitted due to one co-accused having been still absconding. He further submits that the petitioner’s statement as well as the other witnesses including the victim’s statement has been already recorded. However, the prayer for bail is opposed on the ground of the nature and gravity of the allegations.
7. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, and having perused the material available on record, it appears that although the prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected vide order dated 07.08.2026, when the petitioner had approached this Court after having remained in custody for 38 days, the investigation has substantially progressed in the meantime. The petitioner, by now, remained in custody for 90 days; however, the charge-sheet has not yet been filed.
8. This Court finds that the petitioner has remained in custody for a period exceeding 90 days from the date of his first remand and the investigating agency has not submitted the final report within the statutory period prescribed under Section 187(3) of the BNSS. The right accrued to an accused upon expiry of the statutory period prescribed under Section 187(3) of the BNSS is a statutory and indefeasible right.
9. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner is entitled to be released on default/statutory bail.
10. Accordingly, the petitioner, namely, Fakrul Islam, shall be released on bail in connection with Kaki P.S. Case No. 93/2026, under Sections 366/370/34 of the IPC, on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two local sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, Hojai, subject to the following conditions:
i. The petitioner shall appear before the learned trial Court on each date fixed in the case; ii. The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any other authority;
iii. The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned trial Court without prior permission; and
iv. The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation and appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required in accordance with law.
11. It is made clear that the observations made hereinabove are confined only to the consideration of the petitioner's prayer for default/statutory bail and shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
12. The bail application stands allowed and disposed of accordingly.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant