Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010231952025 2025:GAU-AS:15376 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3434/2025 RAJU SHEIKH ALIAS RAJU S/O MAMUD ALI SHEIKH R/O SIMULTOLA P.S. BASANTI DIST. SOUTH 24 PORGONA, WEST BENGAL VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR F HAQUE, MR A ISLAM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER 13.11.2025 1. Heard Mr. A. Islam, learned counsel for the accused applicant. Also heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Page No.# 2/3 2. This application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the accused applicant, namely, Raju Sheikh @ Raju, praying for grant of bail in connection with Paltan Bazar P.S. Case No.295/2025 registered under Sections 61(2)(a)/250 of the BNS, read with Section 12 (2) of the Passport Act, 1967 read with Section 14 (c) of Foreigners Act, 1946. 3. An FIR was lodged on 24.09.2025 by one Paranati Gogoi WSI(P) of Paltanbazar Police Station before the Officer-in-Charge of Paltanbazar police station alleging that on receipt of an information that some suspected Bangladeshi nationals were detained in Boby Lodge, Ulubari, they were apprehended and during verification, it was found that the Bangladeshi nationals came through Meghalaya Border and were travelling to Bangalore for searching works with the help of one person, namely, Raju Sheikh, the accused applicant without any valid documents or Passport. 4. During investigation, it was found that the accused applicant used to deport the Bangladeshi nationals without any valid documents for wrongful gain. 5. The accused applicant was arrested on 24.09.2025 and since then, he is in judicial custody. 6. The learned counsel for the accused applicant submits that the accused applicant is an illiterate person without having any knowledge of the offence as alleged in the FIR and in fact, he is a mason working in Guwahati for a long period of time. 7. The learned counsel for the accused applicant further Page No.# 3/3 submits that the accused applicant has already given his statement before the police and is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation in future. Therefore, the accused applicant should be allowed to go on bail. 8. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has opposed the grant of bail to the accused applicant. 9. Considering the entire facts of the case and materials brought before this Court and taking into account of the fact that there are several instances of trafficking of Bangladeshi nationals by organized offenders without any valid documents for obtaining works for them in different cities in India is rampant in this region, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the accused applicant at this stage. 10. Accordingly, the bail application stands rejected at this stage. 11. Return back the case diary. 12. In view of the aforesaid, this bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant