Gauhati High Court
AB/2254/2026 of AMBAR ALI AND 4 ORS. Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM on 24 September 2026
GAHC010202492026 2026:GAU-AS:14367 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2254/2026 AMBAR ALI AND 4 ORS. S/O IMAN ALI SARKAR, VILL SITALMARI P.S SIALMARI DIST NALBARI, ASSAM 2: AINAL ALI ALIAS AINAL HOQUE S/O HAJRAT ALI VILL GARIGHAT
GAHC010202492026
2026:GAU-AS:14367
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/2254/2026
AMBAR ALI AND 4 ORS.
S/O IMAN ALI SARKAR, VILL SITALMARI P.S SIALMARI DIST NALBARI, ASSAM
2: AINAL ALI ALIAS AINAL HOQUE
S/O HAJRAT ALI
VILL GARIGHAT PS SIALMARI DIST NALBARI
ASSAM
3: MIR HUSSAIN
S/O LATE EYAKUB ALI
VILL KURIHAMARI
P.S SIALMARI DIST NALBARI
ASSAM.
4: NAL MIYA
S/O LATE DEWAN ALI
VILL NO.2 BARTALA
P.S SIALMARI DIST NALBARI
ASSAM.
5: RAMJAN ALI
S/O BARHAN ALI VILL KHALIHAMARI P.S MUKAIMUA
DIST NALBARI
ASSA
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A M KHAN, S RAHMAN,MR. R ISLAM,MR S ISLAM
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS
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 : 25.09.2026
Heard Mr. S. Islam, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. P.S. Lahkar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. By this petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, whereby the petitioners, namely, (i) Ambar Ali (ii) Ainal Ali @ Ainal Hoque (iii) Mr Hussain (iv) Nal Miya (v) Ramjan Ali, praying for grant of pre-arrest bail in connection with Sialmari P.S. Case No. 09/2026 u/s 112/308(6)/308(7)/317(4)/318(4)/ 319(2)/35(2) (3)/61(2)/3(5)/3(8)/3(9) of BNS, 2023.
3. The gist of the allegation is that large body of persons have been working in an organized way to cheat and trap persons who come to the police station for work and lure them into having agreements with the assurance of giving them legal benefits from the problems which they might be facing for which they come to the police station. It is also alleged that the persons also threatened under the offences of POCSO and NDPS Act and it is alleged that in this way money is extorted. It is stated that such property obtained through cheating and extortion constitute stolen property within the meaning of relevant provision of BNS. It is alleged that the activities detected against which prosecution has been launched are not merely against the person defrauded but also interfering with the investigation and the machinery of criminal law.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that they are businessman and cultivator respectively and denies their involvement in the alleged offence. It is submitted that it is specifically stated in para 6 and 7 of the present petition that they are not involved in the same. It is submitted that no specific allegation have been attracted and that some of penal provisions are not even attracted.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that so far in this case two witnesses have been examined but no specific incriminating materials have been noticed from these statements against the present petitioners. However, investigation is still going on.
6. The case diary has been placed before the Court along with the accompanying bail objection.
7. I have carefully perused the bail objection as well as the relevant portions of the case diary. First, I have seen the progress of the investigation. The IO has opposed the grant of bail at this stage, contending that the investigation is continuing and the accused persons may again commit the same types of offences and also might try to tamper with evidence.
8. As already stated above, the prosecution after perusing the case diary has fairly submitted that from the statements of the witnesses examined so far, no specific allegations or incriminating materials emerge against the accused persons. However, the investigation is continuing.
9. Nevertheless, in view of the facts and circumstances, it would be just and fair to grant pre-arrest bail to the accused persons as prayed for, subject to suitable conditions.
10. Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest of the accused- petitioners, they shall be released on bail in connection with Sialmari P.S. Case No.
09/2026
u/s
112/308(6)/308(7)/317(4)/318(4)/
319(2)/35(2) (3)/61(2)/3(5)/3(8)/3(9) of BNS, 2023, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/- each with one suitable surety each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the arresting authority and subject to the following conditions:
(i) They shall appear before the I/O and make themselves available for examination;
(ii) They shall not abscond;
(ii) They shall render full co-operation to remaining investigation;
(iii) They shall not hamper or tamper with evidence;
(iv) They shall not in any manner try to intimidate, harass, harm, or try to influence any witnesses; and
(v) They shall not misuse their liberty to commit any illegal activities including any activities of the kind for which they are being prosecuted.
11. In case of violation of any or more of the bail conditions, the prosecution would be at liberty to move a suitable application before this Court or the jurisdictional Sessions Court for cancellation of the bail.
12. Return back the case diary.
13. The bail petition stands disposed of on the aforesaid terms.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant