Gauhati High Court
Bail Appln./2548/2026 of IQBAL HUSSAIN Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM on 1 September 2026
GAHC010178042026 2026:GAU-AS:12989 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2548/2026 IQBAL HUSSAIN S/O JAKIR HUSSAIN R/O BOGORIBARI P.S MIKIRBHETA DIST- MORIGAON ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM TO BE BY THE REPRESENTED BY THE
GAHC010178042026
2026:GAU-AS:12989
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./2548/2026
IQBAL HUSSAIN
S/O JAKIR HUSSAIN R/O BOGORIBARI P.S MIKIRBHETA DIST- MORIGAON
ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
TO BE BY THE REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
ASSAM
------------
Advocate for : MR. A AHMED
Advocate for : PP
ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM
B E F O R E
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA
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
02.09.2026
Heard Mr. S.K. Poddar and Ms. N.B. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. By this petition under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed the accused/petitioner, for granting bail to the petitioner who is in custody since 01.08.2026 in connection with Moirabari P.S. Case No. 82/2026 u/s 61(2)/319(2)/318(4)/336(3)/340(2)/95/3(5) of the BNS r/w Section 66(c)/66(D) of the IT Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that allegations about cyber crimes have been made in the FIR dated 30.07.2026 however, the petitioner herein are not one of the ten named accused persons and they were arrested during investigation soon after the FIR. It is also contended that the petitioners was not involved in the alleged offences and that they have also been prosecuted due to some political rivalries.
4. The order submitted with reference to the said list that all the articles that were seized by the police from the petitioners are legitimate articles belonging to the petitioner's like cell phone, bank passbook, check book, Aadhar card, etc.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposes the bail and submits that investigation has revealed the involvement of a wide racket, in the nature of organized crime committing cyber offenses pertaining to various customers of banks, etc. It has also been revealed that several Customer Service Points (CSP) of Banks and financial institutions have been misused in commission of the alleged offences. It is submitted that a large quantity of incriminating materials in the nature of scanners, large number of debit cards of various banks, passbooks, POS machines, QR scanners etc.
6. The case diary as called for has been received and perusal of the same reveals sufficient incriminating materials against the petitioners.
7. Considering the above and the gravity of the offense which is severely affecting unsuspecting citizens, it would not be proper to release the petitioners on bail at this stage.
8. Consequently, the prayer for bail stands rejected. JUDGE Comparing Assistant