Gauhati High Court
AB/2212/2026 of ABED ALI Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM on 22 September 2026
GAHC010199192026 2026:GAU-AS:14086 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2212/2026 ABED ALI S/O- LT. BADIUT JAMAL, VILL.- BHOWLAGURI, P.S.- BONGAIGAON, DISTRICT- BONGAIGAON, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC
GAHC010199192026
2026:GAU-AS:14086
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/2212/2026
ABED ALI
S/O- LT. BADIUT JAMAL, VILL.- BHOWLAGURI, P.S.- BONGAIGAON, DISTRICT- BONGAIGAON, ASSAM.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M I HUSSAIN, MUSTAFIZUR RAHMAN,R KHA,MS. P
AHMED
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 : 23.09.2026
Heard Mr. M.I. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. M.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. By this application filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 the petitioner, namely, Abed Ali, has prayed for pre-arrest bail in connection with Bongaigaon P.S.
Case
No.
204/2026
u/s 317(4)/112/318(4)/319(2)/308(6)/308(7)/61(2)/351(2)/3(5) 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 with implication under other offences 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 case diary has been received along with a bail objection.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutrix supports the bail objection and submits that investigation has revealed incriminating materials against the petitioner and that there are direct allegations against him.
6. It is submitted that witnesses have stated about his involvement in the alleged offences and also threatening of persons in connection with such alleged activities.
7. In view of the incriminating materials revealed and the fact that investigation is still in progress, the privilege of pre-arrest bail may not be justified in the instant case and therefore, the instant petition for anticipatory bail stands rejected at this stage.
8. Return back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant