Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 19060 (GAU)

AMON ANDRESH SHINDE v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

Bail Appln./2972/2025 · 2025-09-15

Pranjal Das

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010204152025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2972/2025 AMON ANDRESH SHINDE SON OF ANDRESH SHINDE R/O A T POST NIVDUGE P.S.PATHARDI, DIST. AHMEDNAGAR, MAHARASHTRA. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR D GOSWAMI, MR S AFRIDI,S K DAS Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER 16.09.2025 1. Heard Mr. S. Afridi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Baishya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 2. This petition under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the accused-petitioner, namely, Amon Andresh Shinde, is stated to be in custody since 24.07.2025 praying for grant of bail in connection with Dispur P.S. Case Page No.# 2/2 No.619/2025 under Sections 319(2)/318(4) /316(2)/61(2) of BNS,2023. 3. Case diary as called for is received. 4. The gist of allegation is about suspected involvement of the named accused persons in fraudulent cyber crime of looting innocent persons of their money. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been implicated primarily on suspicion and already completed 55 days in detention. 6. Mr. K. Baishya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that investigation is still continuing in various aspect of the matter. It is further submitted that multiple account details and Q R code are found in the seized mobile phone of the petitioner and the IO has strongly opposed granting of bail to the petitioner projecting his contention that it might be detrimental in investigation. 7. I have also perused the case diary wherein the IO has prepared a detail note and stated that as per investigation one P.R. Ali and Faruq are stated to be the master mind and the present petitioner was in Guwahati for the purpose of such crime on behalf of the alleged master minds. 8. Though 55 days passed however, IO should be given a chance to complete the investigation. 9. Accordingly, the bail application stands rejected and disposed of. 10. Return the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant