Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010179702025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2637/2025 JAINUR ALI ALIAS ZAINUR ALI AND ANR S/O LATE SOUHAB ALI @ LATE CHAHARAB ALI @ LATE SORABH ALI RESIDENT OF KOCHORIA, BORIJANIK PATHAR, PO DODORA, PS HAJO, DISTRICT KAMRUP, ASSAM, PIN 781102 2: SILPISHIKA BORGOHAIN ALIAS PRIYANKA BORGUHAIN D/O SACHIDANANDA BORGUHAIN @ SOSIDANANDA BORGOHAIN RESIDENT OF DULIA GAON CHARAI BAHI PO CHARAI BAHI PS JORHAT DISTRICT JORHAT ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R THADANI, MD A ISLAM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 10.09.2025 Heard Mr. R. Thadani, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. D.P. Page No.# 2/3 Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. This application has been filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for granting bail to the accused petitioners, namely 1. Jainur Ali @ Zainur Ali and 2. Silpishika Borgohain @ Priyanka Borguhain, in respect of Dispur P.S. Case No. 604/2025 under Sections 143(3)/144(2) of BNS, R/W Section 5(1) of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956. Case diary is received. Perused the same. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the present petitioners are innocent and they are not involved in the alleged offence. It is also submitted by Mr. R. Thadani, that they were not FIR named accused and subsequently, they were forwarded in the present case. He further submits that the present petitioner No.1 is a driver by profession and sometimes he gives his car on rent for some customers and the petitioner No.2 is a dance teacher by profession and on the relevant day, they were going for a dinner and thereafter the co-accused Hemanta, also called them to join for the dinner and thereafter, they were caught by police and forwarded before the Court. He further submits that the petitioners are behind the bar since 53 days and thus the I/O got sufficient opportunity to interrogate the present petitioners keeping them in custody and hence, their further custodial interrogation may not be necessary for the purpose of investigation. However, they are ready and willing to extend their cooperation in the further investigation of the case, if they are allowed to go on bail. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted in this regard that the petitioners along with other co-accused person are involved in the business of trafficking of girls, who were subsequently used for prostitution and basically they targeted the poor girls and also arrange customers for the girls. He further submits that the girls were also kept in the residence of the petitioner No.2, where from they were used to supply the girls to different customers. Accordingly, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has raised objection in granting bail to the petitioners. Further, he submits that both the petitioners are in custody for the last 53 days and there is a progress in the investigation though some of the co-accused persons are yet to be apprehended by the police. I have heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and also perused the case diary and the statement of some of the victims recorded by the I/O under Section 183 BNSS. It is seen that there are some incriminating materials against the present petitioners. However, considering the materials in the case diary and the length of detention already undergone by the Page No.# 3/3 petitioners, I find that further custodial detention may not be necessary for the purpose of investigation of the case. Accordingly, I find it a fit case to extend the privilege of bail to the present petitioners. Accordingly, it is provided that on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (rupees twenty thousand) only each with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction learned Chief Judicial Magisrate, Kamrup(M), the accused petitioners named above be enlarged on bail subject to the following conditions:- i) that the petitioners shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required; ii) that the petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. iii) That the petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned CJM, Kamrup(M) without prior permission. In terms of the above, the bail application stands disposed of. Return the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant