Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010237772025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3483/2025 HABIB ULLAH S/O- SIRAJ ALI, R/O- VILL- BOWALGURI, P.O.- GOROIMARI, P.S.- LAHARIGHAT, DIST.- MORIGAON,ASSAM, PIN - 782104. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR A A DEWAN, MR A MALEK,MR H A RASHID Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 06.11.2025 1. Heard Mr. A. A. Dewan, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. This application under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed by the petitioner namely, Habib Ullah, though has been detained behind the bars since 29.09.2025, in connection with Moirabari P. S. Case No. 74/2024 registered under Sections 120B/419/420/467/468/471/34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 66C/66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000. 3. The gist of accusations in this case is that on 15.06.2024, one Pranab Jyoti Rabha, S.I. of Moirabari Police Station lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-Charge of Moirabari Police Station, inter-alia, alleging that on receipt of information through a reliable source that one Ashad Ullah has been involved in the illegal racket of morphing the images of people for the purpose of fraudulently obtaining wrongful loans by showing fake identity from finance company and banks. During investigation, the present petitioner was arrested with accusation that he is also involved in the aforesaid racket and obtained loans from various finance companies using fake Aadhaar cards and PAN cards. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and he is innocent. He further submits that nothing was seized from the possession of the present Page No.# 3/5 petitioner to implicate him in this case. He submits that after his arrest, he was severely tortured by the police and in this respect, an FIR has also been directed to be lodged against the Superintendent of Police of Co- District Laharighat. 5. He further submits that in this case, though medical report regarding the status of the health of the petitioner was called for by this Court. However, the Jail Superintendent has defaulted in sending the said health report. 6. He also submits that in the meanwhile, three of the co-accused, namely, (1) Masudur Rahman, (2) Motibur Rahman and (3) Kabbal Hussain @ Kabal Hussain, have already been released on bail by the Trial Court. 7. He also submits that the petitioner has been detained behind the bars for the last 37 days and he is the sole earning member of the family with minor children to look after. He also submits that he is ready to cooperate in the investigation and ready to abide by any condition imposed. 8. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner is one of the member of the rackets involving in committing such serious financial abuses. 9. He submits that in the case diary there are clear implicating materials against him and as the investigation is still going on, his release at this stage would hamper the course of investigation. 10. He submits that while considering the application for bail, the principle of parity may be applicable only if the co-accused are placed exactly in Page No.# 4/5 similar situation. However, as in the instant case, he submits that there are implicating materials against the petitioner in the case diary and the petitioner may not be granted bail at this stage. 11. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and have gone through the materials on record. 12. It appears that the petitioner has been detained behind the bars for the last 37 days and the materials which are there in the case diary is mainly the statement of the petitioner recorded under Section 180 of the BNSS, 2023. In the meanwhile, some of the co-accused have already been enlarged on bail. It also appears that the petitioner was recorded by the Investigating Officer on 29.09.2025 itself and after that he was not subjected to any further interrogation. Under such circumstances, it appears that if the petitioner cooperates with the Investigating Officer, his further custodial interrogation may not be necessary for fair completion of Moirabari P. S. Case No. 74/2024. 13. In view of the above, the above-named petitioner is allowed to go on bail of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) with one surety of like amount subject to the satisfaction of the learned Ilaka Magistrate with the following conditions: i. The petitioner shall co-operate in the investigation; ii. The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to the informant or to other person who may be acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts before the Investigating Officer or to any Court. Page No.# 5/5 14. Send back the case diary. 15. With the above observations, this bail application is, accordingly, disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant