Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010154762026 2026:GAU-AS:10967 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2075/2026 FAKRUL ISLAM S/O- LATE HAMED ALI, R/O-1 NO. KAKI, 7 NO. GAON, P.S.- KAKI, DIST- HOJAI, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE P.P., ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MD S ALI, MD G HUSSAIN,I AMIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI ORDER Date : 07.08.2026 1. Heard Mr. S Ali, Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner. Also heard Mr. B Sarma, Learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State Respondents. Page No.# 2/5 2. This application has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, (BNSS), 2023, for granting the privilege of bail to the Petitioner namely, Fakrul Islam, who was arrested on 30.06.2026, in connection with Kaki P.S Case No. 93/2023, registered under Sections 366/370/34 of Indian Penal Code, (IPC), 1860. 3. The brief facts of the case is that on 18.09.2023, the Informant lodged an FIR alleging interalia that about 9 years back, her daughter got married with one person and thereafter, had 2 (two) children, a boy aged 8 (eight) years and a girl aged 5 (five) years. It is her alleged case that her daughter, who had gone to Kerala in the name of work in Companies, was later on taken by the accused person in the name of giving her some opportunities to work in companies but instead, she was forcefully involved in human trafficking. Accordingly, a case was registered and investigated upon. 4. Mr. S Ali, Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has been languishing in jail for the last 38 (Thirty eight) days. He further submits that he is not named in the FIR and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. 5. Per contra, Mr. B Sarma, Learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State Page No.# 3/5 Respondents submits that the FIR, which was filed way back on 18.09.2023, the investigation of which could not progress primarily on the ground that the present Petitioner was evading arrest and only upon being arrested on 30.06.2026, the investigation started making some progress. He further submits that during the investigation, the victim girl who gave her statement under Section 164 of Code of Criminal Procedure, (Cr.P.C), 1973, clearly stated before the Ld. jurisdictional Judicial Magistrate that the present Petitioner had sold her for Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh) to the person who received her at Railway Station at Kerala, as per the directions of the co-accused name in the FIR and they forced her to work as a sex worker. He further submits that though few other similarly situated girls, who have been forcefully taken and been forced to involve in human trafficking, has been recovered, however, there are more such girls to be recovered. He further submits that there are more people involved, however, the identity of the same is yet to be ascertained. He, accordingly, submits that grant of bail at this stage could have serious impediment to the ongoing investigation. 6. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the materials available on record, including the Case Diary. Page No.# 4/5 7. A perusal of the Case Diary reveals that one of the victim girls has specifically implicated the petitioner in the commission of the alleged offence. It further appears that the petitioner had been evading arrest for more than three years, on account of which the investigation could not make any meaningful progress. It was only after his arrest on 30.06.2026 that the Investigating Officer was able to proceed further with the investigation. 8. The materials collected during the course of investigation also indicate the involvement of certain other persons whose identities are yet to be ascertained. Besides, a few of the victim girls are still to be traced and recovered. Evidently, the investigation is at a crucial stage. Grant of bail to the petitioner at this juncture is likely to impede the ongoing investigation and may adversely affect the efforts to identify the other perpetrators and recover the remaining victims. Having regard to the gravity of the allegations, the stage of the investigation, and the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage. 9. Accordingly, the bail application stands rejected. Page No.# 5/5 Needless to observe, the observations made herein are only for the purpose of deciding the present bail application and shall not influence the investigation or the trial in any manner. JUDGE Comparing Assistant