Gauhati High Court
Bail Appln./2274/2026 of SHAHBAZ HAIDER Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR on 19 August 2026
GAHC010172862026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2274/2026 SHAHBAZ HAIDER S/O- NEYAZ HAIDER R/O - WARD NO.5 APARTMENT A /13 INDARAPURI COLONY SAMANPURA RAJBAZAR P.S. SHASTRI NAGAR DISTRICT PATNA BIHAR -
GAHC010172862026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./2274/2026
SHAHBAZ HAIDER
S/O- NEYAZ HAIDER R/O - WARD NO.5
APARTMENT A/13
INDARAPURI COLONY
SAMANPURA
RAJBAZAR
P.S. SHASTRI NAGAR
DISTRICT PATNA
BIHAR - 8000014.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
REPRESENTED BY P.P.
ASSAM.
2:THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX
CIRCLE - 5
UNIT D
GUWAHATI
GOVT. OF ASSAM
------------
Advocate for : MR. R B PHOOKAN
Advocate for : PP
ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN
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
20.08.2026
Heard Mr. R.B. Phookan, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. P. Chudhury, learned counsel for the accused and Mr. B. Gogoi, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam, for the State respondent.
2. This application under Section 483 of the BNSS, is preferred by accused, namely, Shahbaz Haider, who has been languishing in jail hazot, since 16.06.2026, in connection with the Special Task Force PS Case No. 02/2026, under Section 61(2)/ 318(3)/ 319(2)/ 336(3)/ 338/ 340(2) of the BNS, for granting bail.
3. It is to be noted here that the aforementioned case has been registered on the basis of one FIR lodged by Dibya Ranjan Borah, Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Circle – 5, Unit – D, Kar Bhawan, on 23.05.2026.
3.1. The essence of allegation, in the FIR dated 23.05.2026, is that fraudulent activities were committed in violation of Assam GST Act and various Sections of BNS, through the creation and operation of fictitious business entities for wrongful availment and false claiming of tax invoices, in the name of non-existence tax payer and also in the name of the firm of the accused person, namely, M/s Assam Bitumex; M/s Barrel Bitumen; and M/s Aida Bitumex.
4. Mr. Phookan, learned counsel for the accused, submits that the accused is the husband of another co-accused, namely, Sahina Sultana, who is the proprietor of the firm, namely M/s Aida Bitumex and that he is no way involved with the offence alleged in the FIR and that the case involves verification of electronic records and evidences, which have already been taken into possession by the IO. Mr. Phookan further submits that the accused was arrested on 16.06.2026, and since then she has been languishing in jail hazoot and that some of the co-accused, including his wife, have been already granted bail by this Court and that he is ready to cooperate with the investigation agency, and therefore, it is contended to allow this petition.
5. Per-contra, Mr. Gogoi, learned Additional Advocate General, has produced the case diary and submits that though his wife is the proprietor of the M/s Aida Bitumex, which has availed input tax credit, amounting to Rs. 7,33,61,984/-, by fraudulent means and forged invoices, yet, it is the present accused who operates the said firm and that the accused hails from Bihar and there is possibility of misusing the liberty if granted bail at this stage. He also submits that availment of huge amount of ITC fraudulently by the accused in the name of the firm without supplying anything is detrimental to the national economy and that she knew that her husband was operating the firm. Mr. Gogoi further submits that the investigation is still in the crucial stage and under such circumstances; it is contended to dismiss the petition.
6. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties, this Court has carefully gone through the petition as well as the documents placed on record and has also perused the case diary with the assistance of Mr. Gogoi, learned Additional Advocate General.
7. It appears that though the firm M/s Aida Bitumex was registered in the name of the wife of the present accused, yet, the said firm was being operated by the present accused. It also appears that the present accused has been languishing in jail hazot since 16.06.2026 and some of the co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail. Further it appears that material part of investigation, so far as the present accused is concerned, is almost completed.
8. Under the given facts and circumstances on record and in the case diary and also considering the period of detention undergone by the accused and balancing the same with the nature and gravity of the offence, as alleged in the FIR, this Court is of the view that his further custodial detention may not be warranted, in the interest of investigation.
9. Accordingly, it is provided that on furnishing a bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- only, with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati, the present accused be enlarged on bail. It is further provided that he shall appear before the I.O. on the first day of every month till charge sheet is submitted by the I.O.
10. In terms of above, this bail application stands disposed of.
11. The case diary be returned. JUDGE Comparing Assistant