Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010169502025 2025:GAU-AS:10361 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2470/2025 ABHISHEK SHARMA AND ANR S/O- BINOD KUMAR SHARMA. R/O- FATASIL, GLASS FACTORY COMPOUND, SHARMA RICE MILLS, HOUSE NO.42, P.S.- BHARALUMUKH, DIST.- KAMRUP(M), ASSAM. 2: JYOTI SHARMA W/O- ABHISHEK SHARMA. R/O- FATASIL GLASS FACTORY COMPOUND SHARMA RICE MILLS HOUSE NO.42 P.S.- BHARALUMUKH DIST.- KAMRUP(M) ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. AJAY SARMA, MR. M K CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 06.08.2025 1. Heard Mr. M.K. Choudhury, the learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr. R. Gohain, the learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam. 2. This application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioners, namely, Abhishek Sharma and Jyoti Sharma, who are detained behind the bars since 16.07.2025 (for the last 21 days)in connection with Sonapur P.S. Case No. 113/2025, under Sections 143/317(4)/49/3(5) of BNS, 2023, read with Sections 14/15/16/17 of the Assam Games and Betting Act, 1970. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 15.07.2025, one Abdul Kader Sheikh had lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-Charge of Sonapur Police Station, inter alia, alleging that a secret information was received through reliable sources regarding illegal gambling activities being carried on at Club Nirvana Resort, Kumarkuchi, Sonapur and accordingly, a team of police officials was constituted and it conducted search operation in the said resort. 4. During search operation in room Nos. 1, 3 and 8 on the 1st floor of the old building of Club Nirvana, certain objectionable materials which can be used for the purpose of gambling were recovered therefrom, like casino poker chips, cards, poker dealer button and one lottery bingo machine which may be used in gambling/casino. Page No.# 3/5 5. It is also stated in the FIR that the owner/authorities of the Club Nirvana Resort were suspected to have connivance with the accused persons, who booked the aforesaid rooms, namely, Lal Chhanhima Sailo, Sri Lalfakawma Ralte, Lalringheta and Joseph Lalparmawia. 6. It is also alleged in the FIR that the aforesaid accused persons were provided with necessary facilities by the club authorities to do unlawful activities like gambling and another criminal acts like human trafficking. It is further alleged in the FIR that the owner and the Manager of the Club Nirvana Resort were involved in illegal business of human trafficking and they used to illegally procure girls and supply them to the customers in the resort premises. 7. Both the petitioners have been named in the FIR. 8. It is pertinent to mention herein that this is for the second time the petitioners have approached this Court for seeking bail. Their earlier prayer for bail was rejected by this Court on 23.07.2025 in Bail Appln. No. 2343/2025 and Bail Appln. No. 2293/2025 respectively. 9. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioner No. 1 is in no way related to the offence alleged in the FIR. 10. He submits that he is not even an employee of the Club Nirvana Resort where the offence alleged in the FIR was allegedly committed. 11. He also submits that the petitioner No. 2 is only an employee of the Club Nirvana Resort and her duty was to look after the house keeping and to attend to the guests. However, she is in no way connected with the offence alleged in the FIR. Page No.# 4/5 12. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners has also submitted that the petitioners are detained behind the bars since 16.07.2025 and by now, the investigation might have progressed fairly. He, therefore, submits that considering the period of detention undergone by the petitioners, they may be allowed to go on bail. 13. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. B. Sarma has vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the above-named petitioners. He submits that their application for bail was rejected by this Court a few days earlier, and a few days earlier only, that too after finding sufficient materials against them in the Case Diary. He also submits that in the meanwhile, the Investigating Officer has recorded the statements of few more victims, who were subjected to sexual exploitation in the Club Nirvana Resort and they have specifically implicated both the petitioners. 14. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and have gone through the updated Case Diary which has been produced by the the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 15. This is for the second time, both the petitioners have approached this Court seeking bail. Their earlier bail applications were dismissed by this Court after finding sufficient incriminating materials against them in the Case Diary. The petitioners have approached again, however, they have not shown any new grounds for seeking bail, while approaching again before this Court within a short interval of less than 10(ten) days, except the plea that in the meanwhile, the investigation might have progressed which may not require their further custodial interrogation. Page No.# 5/5 16. On perusal of the Case Diary, it appears that there sufficient materials in the Case Diary against both the petitioners. The statements of the victims which have been recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, 2023 after rejection of the earlier bail applications of the petitioners also implicates both the petitioners in the offence pertaining to sexual exploitation of the victim girls as well as alleged offence under the Assam Games and Betting Act, 1970. 17. One of the victim girls, whose statement has been recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, 2023 has specifically implicated both the petitioners regarding their role in sexual exploitation of the victim girls in the Club Nirvana Resort. 18. The investigation is at a crucial stage where some of the victim girls are yet to be examined. 19. Considering the incriminating materials against the petitioners in the Case Diary, this Court is reluctant to grant bail to them at this stage. 20. The prayer for bail of both the above-named petitioners is, therefore, rejected. 21. Send back the Case Diary. 22. With the above observations, this case is accordingly dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant