Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010151972026 2026:GAU-AS:11792 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2066/2026 SRI PARTHA PRATIM BORUAH S/O SRI SUMANTA BORUAH @ SRI CHANDRESW, R/O. NAKHAT, NAGAON, P/S. MORAN, DIST. DIBRUGARH, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY PP ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR Z RAHMAN, G TALUKDAR,MR S DEKA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER 18.08.2026 Heard Ms. G. Talukdar, learned counsel for the accused and Mr. P. Barthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. This application, under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, is preferred by the accused, namely, Sri Partha Pratim Boruah, who has been languishing in jail Page No.# 2/4 hajot since 18.06.2026, in connection with Khowang P.S. Case No. 15/2026, registered under Sections 147/148/308(2)/61(2) of the BNS, 2023, read with Sections 10/13 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 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 SI Susanta Protim Boruah, of Khowang Police Station, on 18.06.2026. The essence of allegation against the present accused in the FIR, dated 18.06.2026, is that on 07.06.2026, information was received at Khowang Police Station that one Sri Lambit Gogoi has been missing. Accordingly, an enquiry was initiated and during the course of the enquiry, the Call Detail Records (CDR) of the missing person, bearing mobile number 6002009901, were obtained and analyzed. In the meantime, another person, namely Sri Probin Sonowal, of Tinthengia, Khowang, reported at Police Station that he had received extortion calls, allegedly from ULFA (I) using mobile number 9612068032. The CDR of the said mobile number was also obtained for analysis and during analysis, it has been found that the IMEI number of the mobile handset belonging to the missing person was being used with mobile number 9612068032. Upon further examination, it was ascertained that the mobile phone of the missing person, Sri Lambit Gogoi, was being used by present accused, namely, Partha Protim Boruah. During interrogation, the accused admitted that he is in close contact with Sri Abhilekh Borah @ Anurag Axom, of ULFA(I) and under his supervision and instruction, Sri Lambit Gogoi was recruited and facilitated to a ULFA (I) camp. It was further revealed that the accused, along with others, used the mobile phone of Sri Lambit Gogoi to make extortion calls in the name of ULFA (I). The accused person also facilitated WhatsApp login from the number 9612068032, to enable extortion Page No.# 3/4 calls to be made by Abhilekh Borah @Anurag Axom. 4. Ms. Talukdar, learned counsel for the accused submits that the accused was arrested on 18.06.2026, and since then, he has been languishing in jail hajot for the last 60 days. She also submits that the accused is innocent and is no-way involved in the offences alleged in the FIR, and that he is ready to cooperate with the investigating agency and therefore, she has contended to allow this application. 5. Per contra, Mr. Barthakur, learned APP for the State respondent, by producing the case diary before this Court, submits that the I.O. has collected sufficient incriminating materials against the accused, and that investigation is going on and enlarging the accused on bail at this stage may hamper the same and under such circumstances, he has contended to dismiss this application. 6. Having heard the submission of the learned counsel for both the parties, this Court has carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on record and also gone through the case diary with the assistance of Mr. Barthakur, learned APP for the State respondent. 7. It appears that the I.O. has collected some materials in support of the allegations made in the FIR. However, it also appears that the accused has been languishing in jail hajot since 18.06.2026, and the I.O. has achieved substantial progress in the investigation of this case 8. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the view that further custodial detention of the accused seems to be unwarranted, herein this case. And Page No.# 4/4 accordingly, this Court is inclined to allow this petition. 9. It is provided that on furnishing a bond of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dibrugarh, the accused shall be enlarged on bail. 10. Case diary be returned. 11. In terms of the above, this Bail Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant