Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010204872026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2805/2026 AKLAS UDDIN S/O LATE ABDUL NOOR, VILL- KHADIMAN, P.O. AND P.S.- BADARPUR, DIST- SRIBHUMI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H R A CHOUDHURY, MR. SAYED SALIM AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 17.09.2026 Heard MR. HRA Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. S. Naznin, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. By this application, the petitioner has sought for bail in connection with Badarpur PS Case No. 123/2026 registered under Page No.# 2/3 Sections61(2)/318(4)/319(2)/308(7)/317(4)/351(2)/351(3)/111/3(5)/3(6) and 3(9) of BNS, 2023. The FIR in connection with which the petitioner was arrested on 07.09.2026 was lodged by the police personnel of DSB, Sribhumi District stating inter alia that a group of person pursuant to a criminal conspiracy without any authority or without any professional qualifications has stationed themselves in an around the precincts of the Police Station and are making a business of exploiting members of the public, who come to the Police Station with police work. It was also alleged that the said group use to lure the person, who come to the Police Station and forces them to file an FIR or reach compromises amongst them and give deceitful advise and as a result of which, they take money. 3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and that during investigation of the said case, the petitioner was arrested on the said vague charges. He submits that in the forwarding report no specific allegation is made against the petitioner. 4. Mr. B. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, however, submits that the allegations in the FIR is serious and that during investigation, the complicity of the petitioner was found out and he was arrested. 5. Upon consideration of the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the parties, more so, in view of the fact vague allegations are made against the petitioner, who was of 70 years of age and there being no persons mentioned who has been victimized by the petitioner, this Court deems it fit to enlarge the petitioner on bail on furnishing of bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of CJM, Sribhumi, under the following conditions: Page No.# 3/3 i) the petitioner will appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for. ii) the petitioner will not hamper, tamper with the evidence, neither influence the witnesses connected with the case. iii) the petitioner will not leave the place of jurisdiction without the permission of the concerned Court. 6. Petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant