Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010183252026 2026:GAU-AS:12352 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2012/2026 AFTAR UDDIN ALIAS MOINA MIYA S/O - LATE AKADDAS ALI R/O VILLAGE - BAMUNGAON, P.O. - TINIALI BAZAR, P.S. - LANKA, DISTRICT - HOJAI ASSAM, PIN -782446, CONTACT NO. 6000519860 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D P BORAH, MR B PAUL Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 27.08.2026 Heard Mr D P Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr B Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. 2. By this application, the petitioner has prayed for pre-arrest bail in connection with Lanka PS Case No. 132 of 2026, registered under Section 318(4)/316(2)/61(2) of the BNS, 2023. Page No.# 2/3 3. The FIR in connection with which the petitioner is apprehending arrest was lodged on 19.06.2026 by the informant stating, inter alia, that there was a business transaction between the informant and the accused persons which are 3 (three) in number, arrayed in the said FIR and the petitioner being accused No. 3, and in pursuant to the said business transaction, the informant has given money to the accused persons, who were involved in a nursery business and that the informant had given Rs. 46,14,000/-, through cash and online channels to the petitioner and others. It was also stated that an agreement was entered into between the parties and it was specifically stipulated therein that if the accused No. 1 failed to pay the money back to the informant, the accused Nos. 2 and 3 would pay the money and the accused No. 3 is the petitioner herein. It was, thereafter, stated that although the accused persons, including the petitioner had issued cheques to the informant, but the cheques were dishonoured due to insufficiency of fund. As such, the informant alleges that he was therefore, cheated by the accused persons, including the petitioner. 4. Mr D P Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations made in the FIR involves civil disputes and at no point of time, any criminal offence was made out much less, cheating which requires fraudulent intention from the very inception. 5. Mr B Sarma, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, however, submits on perusal of the Case Diary that the bail application filed by the petitioner before the learned Court of Sessions Judge, Hojai was rejected on the ground that the money which was taken by the petitioner and others were not used in the business, rather it was used for purchasing landed properties as well as vehicles. 6. Upon consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsels, more so, in view of the allegations made in the FIR which amounted to civil disputes, this Court deems it fit that the petitioners be released on pre-arrest bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/-, with one local surety to the satisfaction of the arresting authority, under the Page No.# 3/3 following conditions:- i) the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 7 (seven) days from the date of the order; ii) the petitioner shall not hamper and tamper with the evidence of the case, and/or influence the witnesses; and iii) the petitioner shall not leave their residence without prior permission of the Investigating Officer. 7. Bail Application stands disposed of. 8. Send back the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant