Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010132962025 2025:GAU-AS:10402 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1393/2025 MAHIB ULLAH @ MOHIBULLA S/O- LATE ABU BAKAR SIDDIQUE, R/O-VILL.-DURABANDHI BEEL, WARD NO.10, PO. AND P.S.-MOIRABARI, DIST.-MORIGAON, ASSAM, PIN-782126. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M U MAHMUD, MS. B CHETIA,MS. D BORA,MR S ISLAM,MR S H MAHMUD Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 05.08.2025 1. Heard Mr. M.U. Mahmud, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam. Page No.# 2/5 2. This application under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Mahib Ullah @ Mohibulla, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Moirabari P.S. Case No. 224/2023, under Sections 120(B)/419/420/467/468/471/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Section 66(C)/66(D) of IT Act, 2000. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 2nd November, 2023, one Pankaj Das, had lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-Charge of Moirabari Police Station, inter alia, alleging that an email has been received from Ajay Gupta regarding suspicious bank transactions in IDFC Bank using his credentials in the State of Assam. 4. It is also stated in the FIR during preliminary inquiry made in this regard, it was found that one person named Majaharul Islam was involved in the offence alleged therein and accordingly, he was apprehended and suspicious materials like Aadhaar Card, PAN Card and Voter ID Card were seized therefrom 5. It is also alleged in the FIR that the said Majaharul Islam implicated the present petitioner during interrogation and some other co- accused persons. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is in no way involved in the offence alleged in the FIR. He further submits that the petitioner is immediate neighbour of the co- accused Majaharul Islam and there has been family dispute between them and therefore, he has been falsely implicated in this case. He also submits Page No.# 3/5 that nothing was seized from the possession of the present petitioner except one pulsar bike. 7. He also submits that incriminating materials were seized from the FIR named accused persons, namely, Majaharul Islam and one Mofidur Jaman. 8. He also submits that in the meanwhile, the Investigating Officer has arrested 5(five) accused persons, including Majaharul Islam in connection with the case. 9. He further submits that only 5(five) persons have already been granted bail. He also submits that the said Majaharul Islam was granted bail by a co-ordinate bench of this Court on 04.01.2025 and while granting bail, an observation was made that the incriminating materials are there against the said Majaharul Islam. 10. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this is an old case of the year 2023 and the petitioner is ready to operate in the investigation. He submits that by now, investigation might have progressed and as the petitioner is ready to cooperate in the investigation, his custodial interrogation may not be necessary. 11. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr. K. K. Parasar, has objected to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner and has produced the Case Diary of Moirabari P.S. Case No. 224/2023. 12. He submits that the petitioner is the accomplice of the FIR named accused Majaharul Islam in commission of the alleged offence. Page No.# 4/5 13. He submits that there are materials in the Case Diary against the present petitioner having participated in the forging of documents, on the basis of which Majaharul Islam took 3(three) numbers of loans from different banks of total Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs). 14. He also submits that since the offence involved in this case affect the economy of the State, lenient view should not be taken and anticipatory bail may not be granted. 15. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and have gone through the Case Diary. 16. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the meanwhile all the arrested accused persons have been released on bail. 17. On perusal of the Case Diary, it appears that immediately after arrest of the co-accused, he disclosed the name of the present petitioner having role in the commission of the offence alleged in the FIR. 18. It also appears that after apprehension of the co-accused, namely, Majaharul Islam, he also led the police to the house of the present petitioner, however, on seeing the police, the petitioner absconded therefrom and since then, he could not be apprehended. Since the offence involved in this case relates to financial crime using Information Technology tools and since there are sufficient materials in the Case Diary against the present petitioner, this Court is of the considered opinion that mere fact that the police has been unable to arrest the petitioner since 2023, in itself would not justify the grant of anticipatory bail to him in offences involving huge financial transactions Page No.# 5/5 19. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the above-named petitioner is therefore rejected. 20. Send back the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant