Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010289522025 2026:GAU-AS:1942 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/3050/2025 ISHAN AHMED S/O KOUSAR AHMED, R/O VILL AMOLAPATTY, PO. AND PS. AMOLAPATTY, DIST. DIBRUGARH, ASSAM, PIN 786008 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR E AHMED, MR. R A MAZUMDER,MR. R A CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS O R D E R 11.02.2026 Heard Mr. R.A. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Baishya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Page No.# 2/3 Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, whereby the petitioner, namely, Ishan Ahmed, has prayed for granting pre-arrest bail, apprehending arrest in connection with Crime Branch P.S. Case No. 12/2025 under Sections 316/318/61 of BNS, 2023. 3. It is submitted that the petitioner received notice under Section 35(3) and that he is willing to appear before the I.O. but he is apprehending arrest. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused petitioner is not involved in the alleged offence and that he is not involved in any monetary transactions regarding the same. 4. Relying upon a decision of the Karnataka High Court in the cases of Abrar Kazi Vs. State of Karnataka in Criminal Petition No.2929/2020 and Sri. Manoj Kumar @ Monty Vs. State of Karnataka in Criminal Petition No. 6386/2022 , it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that any allegations of betting on games and match fixing would not amount to any offence of cheating. 5. It is fairly submitted by the learned counsel that the decision rendered by the Karnataka High Court has been taken up in appeal to the Hon’ble Apex Court and the matter is pending there for final pronouncement of the legal position. 6. The case diary has been received along with a bail objection. 7. Mr. K. Baishya, the learned Additional P.P. submits that the investigation has revealed sufficient incriminating materials against the present petitioner and that independent witnesses as well as digital evidence is available regarding the same. Page No.# 3/3 8. It is submitted that police investigation is still on regarding the involvement of the whole racket and therefore, pre-arrest bail may not be considered at this stage. 9. I have given consideration to the matter and also the decision cited at the bar. I have also considered the rival submissions. I have perused the relevant portions of the case diary. 10. It is revealed from the testimony of some witnesses that the present petitioner and another asked them for money to purchase players illegally. It appears that the investigation clearly lends support to the allegations about involvement of the present petitioner as well, in the alleged offences. 11. In similar circumstances, the pre-arrest bail of other co-accused have been rejected by this Court. 12. In the given facts and circumstances, I am unable to accept the prayer of the petitioner for pre-arrest bail and hence, the same stands rejected. 13. Return back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant