Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010147672026 2026:GAU-AS:10864 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1994/2026 AVIK DAS ALIAS ABHIMANYU DAS S/O-SHRI-KAMALAKHAYA DAS R/O-CHAPAIDANG. P.S-PRAGJYOTISHPUR DIST-KAMRUP (M), ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENT BY THE P.P, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N J DUTTA, MR. M HOQUE Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER 05.08.2026 Heard Mr. T.J. Mahanta, learned Senior counsel, assisted by Mr. M. Hoque, learned counsel for the accused and also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam, appearing for the State respondent. 2. This application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, is preferred by the accused, namely, Avik Das @ Abhimanyu Das, who has Page No.# 2/3 been languishing in jail hazot since 04.07.2026, in connection with Pragjyotishpur P.S. Case No.82/2026, under Section 115(2)/127(2)/351(3)/308(5)/309(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 read with Section 27(1) of the Arms Act, 1959, for grant of bail. 3. It is to be noted here that the aforementioned case has been registered on the basis of one FIR lodged by one Bishan Sonowal, on 02.07.2026. The essence of allegation in the FIR, dated 02.07.2026, is that the informant Bishan Sonowal worked as the Manager of BPO Centre owned by the accused from 18.06.2026 to 28.06.2026 and during the course of his employment, he was allegedly subjected the informant to continuous threat and intimidation and was also deprived of payment of his legitimate wages and that on 28.06.2026, he was called to the residence of the accused at Chapaidang, Bonda, where the accused, who has been possessing 3 rifles and one pistol, demanded a sum of Rs.5,50,000/- from him and the accused also threatened to kill him at gun point and compel him to write and sign certain papers under duress and also physically assaulted him and fired one round near his feet with the intention to intimidating him and compelled him to transfer a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- through online payment and the accused also wrongfully detained his Boleno Car, registered in the name of the informant's mother, as security for remaining amount of Rs.2,50,000/- and also he threatened to scrap the vehicle if the amount is not paid and he has continuously been threatening the informant and mentally harassing him over telephone. 4. Mr. 4. Mr. Mahanta, learned counsel for the accused, submits that the accused is languishing in jail hazot for last 32 days and that the allegations levelled in the FIR are false and in fact, the informant had invested in the business of the accused and that the accused is ready to cooperate with the investigating agency and therefore, it is contended to allow this application. He also submits that the accused has licence of his pistol and the licence is enclosed with this petition also. 5. Per contra, Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam, has vehemently opposed the petition. Producing the case diary before this Court, he submits Page No.# 3/3 that the accused is a habitual offender and several cases are registered against him and though the accused has produced one licence for the pistol possessed by him, the same was issued by the District Magistrate, Dimapur and a verification letter has been sent to ascertain the correctness of the same and the report has not yet been received and the I.O. has collected sufficient incriminating materials against him and therefore, it is contended to dismiss the petition. 6. Having heard the submission of learned counsel for both the parties, this Court has carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on record and also perused the case diary with the assistance of Mr. Sarma, learned Addl. P.P. 7. The case diary indicates that the I.O. has collected sufficient incriminating materials against the accused in support of the allegation made in the FIR, and he has also seized one empty cartridge from the courtyard of the accused and that regarding the licence issued by the District Magistrate, Dimapur, to the accused, verification is still going on and the report is still awaited. Further it appears that as many as 4 cases are pending against him, being Pragjyotishpur P.S. Case No.362/2021, Chandmari P.S. Case No.318/2023, Sarupathar P.S. Case No.06/2024 and Agia P.S. Case No.15/2025, which clearly indicates his criminal antecedents. Further, there is specific allegation in the FIR and also in his statement, the informant clearly stated about the intimidation being received by him from the accused. 8. And under the given facts and circumstances, this Court is of the view that this is not a fit case where the privilege of bail can be granted to the accused and accordingly, the same stands dismissed. 9. Case diary be returned. Comparing Assistant Sd/- Robin Phukan JUDGE