Gauhati High Court
Bail Appln./1523/2026 of NAJIRUL ISLAM Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM on 22 June 2026
GAHC010114922026 2026:GAU-AS:9048 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1523/2026 NAJIRUL ISLAM S/O- ROFIKUL ISLAM VILL- DHUPAGURI PATHAR. P.S- DHING DISTRICT NAGAON, ASSAM. PIN-782123 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY
GAHC010114922026
2026:GAU-AS:9048
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./1523/2026
NAJIRUL ISLAM
S/O- ROFIKUL ISLAM VILL- DHUPAGURI PATHAR. P.S- DHING DISTRICT
NAGAON, ASSAM. PIN-782123
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N J DUTTA, MR. M.A. BARBHUIYA,MR J FIRDAUS
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 : 23.06.2026
Heard Mr. N.J. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This application has been filed under section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraskha Sanhita, 2023, whereby the accused petitioner namely, Najirul Islam, has prayed for bail in connection with Dhing P.S. Case No.
132/2026 under Section 61(2)/316(2)/317(2)/318(4) of BNS, 2023 r/w Section 66(C)/66 IT Act.
3. He was arrested on 25.05.2026 and stated to have been police remand till 30.05.2026 and since then, he has been detained in judicial custody.
4. The case was lodged based on an FIR. The gist of allegations in the FIR is that due to defect in SBI cash deposit machine, the informant made two transactions from two different persons in exchange of being cashed and after receiving the amount, he made an online transaction for the next working day for his brother. Thereafter, his brother also made a transaction and both the accounts were frozen. Later, upon informing the bank, the informant came to know that his account and his brother account were frozen. Subsequently, the present petitioner and other were arrested.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the offences being punishable up to 7 years and no notice was given to the petitioner under section 35 of the BNSS. It was also submitted that he has been custodially examined and detained in custody for about 30 days vis-a-vis the applicable statutory period of 60 days.
6. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State opposing the bail, submits that there were sufficient grounds for arresting the accused person and investigation has also indicated involvement in such illegal financial transactions, constituting cyber crimes.
7. I have perused the relevant portions of the case diary. It is revealed from the investigation per se that the accused person in collusion with others have been engaging in several illegal financial activities, targeting bank accounts of customers and such activities have proceeded beyond the State of Assam and that the account of the informant and his brother were frozen at the initiative of the police from other States, including Maharashtra and Bihar.
8. Considering the nature of offence and the materials revealed during investigation, the bail petition stands rejected at this stage.
9. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant