Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010009252025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./124/2025 ABDUL ALI S/O YUNNIS ALI R/O HAJO, SANIADI P.S. HAJO, DIST. KAMRUP, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. U K BARMAN, MR. R KONWAR,MR D PEGU,MR H ALI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER 29.01.2025 Heard Mr. U.K. Barman, learned counsel for the accused and Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. This application under Section 483 of the BNSS, is preferred by accused namely, Abdul Ali, who has been languishing in jail hazot in connection with the Basistha P.S. Case No. 888/2024, under Sections 77/308(2) of the BNS read with Section 67 of the IT Act, for granting bail. Page No.# 2/3 3. It is to be noted here that the said case has been registered on the basis of an FIR lodged by Smti ‘X’ (name withheld), on 10.12.2024. The essence of allegation against the accused is that he is the owner of P.G. Tailor situated at Basistha, Natun Bazar and he had forwarded a naked video to the informant and thereafter, demanded money from her and also threatened with dire consequences and to make the same viral in the social media. 4. Mr. Barman, learned counsel for the accused submits that the accused was arrested on 11.12.2024 and since then he has been languishing in jail hazot. Mr. Barma further submits that the first offence Section 67 of the IT Act is bailable offence. Mr. Barman also submits that the other offences are not attracted here in this case and that he is ready to cooperate with the investigating agency and therefore, it is contended to allow this petition. 5. On the other hand, Mr. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor by producing the case diary submits that the IO has collected sufficient incriminating materials against the accused and the allegation is serious in nature and therefore, it is contended to dismiss the petition. 6. Having heard the submission of learned counsel for both the parties, I have carefully gone through the petition as well as the documents placed on record and also perused the case diary with the assistance of learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 7. Perusal of the case diary reveals that the IO has collected sufficient incriminating materials in support of the allegation made in the FIR. The offences are not doubt serious in nature and the investigation is still going on and enlarging the accused on bail at this stage will misdirect the investigation. 8. In view of above, this court is of the view that this is not a fit case Page No.# 3/3 where the privilege of bail can be extended to the accused. 9. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed. 10. The case diary be returned. JUDGE Comparing Assistant