Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010285462025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/497/2026 JIBESWAR GAM AND 2 ORS S/O- LATE AJOY GAM, VILL.- NO. 1 BOGOYA, P.S. GARAMUR, DIST. MAJULI, ASSAM 2: UPEN RAJ NATH S/O- LATE MIHIRAM NATH VILL.- JOHAMARI P.S. THELAMARA DIST. SONITPUR ASSAM 3: SHAHIDUL ISLAM S/O- ROISUDDIN VILL.- DOLONI JURIA P.S. JURIA DIST. NAGAON ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, NEW CM BLOCK, 3RD FLOOR, JANATA BHAWAN, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006. 2:THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME AND POLITICAL DEPARTMENT 2ND FLOOR I-BLOCK JANATA BHAWAN DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006. 3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM Page No.# 2/4 HOME AND POLITICAL DEPARTMENT 3RD FLOOR I-BLOCK JANATA BHAWAN DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006. 4:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM ASSAM POLICE HEADQUARTERS ULUBARI GUWAHATI-781007. 5:THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE GUWAHATI PANBAZAR GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN-781001. 6:THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE CID CYBER POLICE STATION ULUBARI GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN- 781007. 7:DHANMANI DEKA INSPECTOR OF POLICE C/O- THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE CID CYBER POLICE STATION ULUBARI GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN- 781007 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H R A CHOUDHURY, MR. M K HUSSAIN,MR. I U CHOWDHURY,MR. A M AHMED,P. GHOSH,B DAS Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, Page No.# 3/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 04.02 .2026 Heard Mr. A. M. Ahmed, learned counsel for petitioner. This petitioner is before this Court seeking a direction to the respondent Authorities that his arrest vide communication dated 27.11.2025 in CID Cyber P.S. Case No. 13/2025, under Section 319(2)/ 336(4)/ 356(2)/ 61(2) BNS, 2023, Read with Section 66(D) of the IT Act, 2000 was illegal as these are all bail-able offences, and though due was released on bail by an order dated 27.11.2025, passed by the learned SDJM-II, Kamrup Metro. The counsel for the petitioners submits that this is contrary to the judgment rendered by Bombay High Court in Writ Petition No. 2436/2023 and also the judgment of the Apex Court rendered in Rini Johar and Another –vs- State of Madhya Pradesh and Others, reported in (2016) 11 Supreme Court Cases 703. Therefore, the petitioner filed the writ petition with two prayers: 1) Direction to the respondent to pay adequate compensation 2) To take action against the erring officials for illegal detention. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Cyber P.S. Case No. 13/2025, under Section 319(2)/ 336(4)/ 356(2)/ 61(2) BNS, 2023, Read with Section 66(D) of the IT Act, 2000, has not been assailed by the petitioner by filing appropriate proceedings under the BNSS. Further, he has not lodged any complaint before the superior authorities in respect of the allegations against the I/O and the other officers on the ground that he was kept in detention notwithstanding that the Sections in which the above mentioned case was registered are bail-able offences. Page No.# 4/4 After arguing for some time, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he be permitted to approach the appropriate authorities and take records to the remedies available there under, including the Commission for Police Accountability. In that view of the matter, writ petition is stands dismissed as not pressed. Mr. B. N. Das, learned counsel appears for the Respondent State. Needless to say, in the event that the authorities, in response to any such complaint lodged by the petitioner, do not proceed as per law, the petitioner shall be at liberty to approach the Court again. JUDGE Comparing Assistant