Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010020322025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./298/2025 INAMUL HOQUE S/O HASEN ALI R/OVILL-TATIKATA PATHAR P.O. ANDP.S. MOIRABARI DIST.MORIGON, ASSAM PIN- 782126 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, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MALASRI NANDI ORDER Date : 28 .02. 2025 Heard Mr. H.A. Rashid, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. K. Baishya, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, appearing for the State respondent. This is an application filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, seeking bail by the petitioner namely Inamul Page No.# 2/3 Hoque in connection with Moriogaon P.S. Case No. 74/2024 under Section under Sections 120B/ 419/ 420/ 467/ 468/ 471/ 34 IPC, read with Section 66(C)/ 66(D) of the I.T. Act, 2000. The case diary is received and perused. As per the FIR, the allegation is that the accused person alongwith some other co-accused had been running an illegal racket and morphed the images of people from different location and fraudulently creates numerous identities with a view to take loan from different financial companies by using electronic devices. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has not taken any loan from any financial institution or bank. Apart from that he has been languishing in custody for last 57 days since his arrest on 02.01.2025. It is also submitted that the name of the petitioner is not mentioned in the FIR and except Section 467 IPC, the other offence as alleged, mandatory period of custody is 60 days. It is further contended that as per allegation made in the FIR, Section 467 IPC is not attracted here in this case. Therefore, considering the period of detention, the prayer for bail may be considered. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that as per the case diary nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner, and substantial part of investigation is almost completed. Hence, length of detention may be considered. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the case diary, it transpires that further custodial interrogation is not required for the purpose of investigation of the case. Page No.# 3/3 Accordingly, prayer for bail is allowed. It is directed that the accused/ petitioner named above shall be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Morigaon in connection with the aforementioned case. The direction for bail is further subject to the conditions that: (a) the accused-petitioner shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of learned CJM, Morigaon without prior written permission from him/ her. (b) the accused-petitioner shall not hamper with the investigation and tamper with the evidence of the case; and, (c) the accused-petitioner 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. In terms of the above, this bail application stands disposed of. Return the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant