Gauhati High Court
AB/1698/2026 of SHAHIN AHMED Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM on 24 August 2026
GAHC010152322026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1698/2026 SHAHIN AHMED S/O ABDUL MAJIDR/O VILLAGE CHARING PATHAR, P.S. MURAJHAR DISTRICT HOJAI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010152322026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/1698/2026
SHAHIN AHMED
S/O ABDUL MAJIDR/O VILLAGE CHARING PATHAR, P.S. MURAJHAR
DISTRICT HOJAI, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. S K NARGIS, MR SARFRAZ NAWAZ,MS N SULTANA
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR
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 : 25.08.2026 Heard Ms. S.K. Nargis, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. The petitioner has been granted interim bail on 28.07.2026, considering the fact that when the alleged papers were used by the main accused, the petitioner was not even born on that date.
Page No.# 2/2 The case diary has been produced by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, which reveals that the petitioner had given some set of documents during the police verification for renewal of the passport. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the main accused has been granted bail. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that since the petitioner had knowingly submitted the documents collected from his father to his cousin, the petitioner may not be allowed to enjoy the privilege of bail, as he may be involved in the alleged offence. In view of the above, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner, who is aged about 22 years and supplied the documents which were perhaps available with him at the time of document verification, does not require to be interrogated in custody. Accordingly, the interim bail granted on 28.07.2026 is made absolute, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall continue to participate in and cooperate with the investigation. In the event of failure to participate in or cooperate with the investigation, the bail granted to the petitioner shall be liable to be recalled/cancelled. Anticipatory bail application stands disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant