Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010205182026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2863/2026 RAJU ALI S/O SARIFUL HOQUE, R/O BHOKELIMARA, P.O. RANGAMATI, P.S. MANGALDOI, DISTRICT DARRANG, ASSAM, PIN 784125 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE LEARNED PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR A K AHMED, MR. R AHMED,MS P KAKATI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 28.09.2026 Heard Mr. AK Ahmed, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. KK Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. By this application, the petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Barpeta PS Case No. 336/2026 registered under Sections61(2)/308(6)/308(7)/318(4)/319(2)/112(1)/112(2)/351(2)/3(5) of BNS, Page No.# 2/3 2023. The FIR in connection with which the petitioner was arrested and put behind the bars on 05.09.2026 was lodged by the police personnel of Barpeta Police Station stating inter alia that the petitioner along with nine others without any lawful authority or without any professional qualifications have stationed themselves in and around the Police Station and is making a business of exploiting members of the public, who come there for police work. 3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that no specific allegation is made against the petitioner and that the FIR discloses vague allegations against many persons. 4. On the other hand, Mr. KK Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State on the perusal of the Case Diary submits that the victim has stated about the money being taken by accused persons arrayed in the FIR but however he submits that no specific allegations is made against the present petitioner. He however submits that there are evidence showing that petitioner along with others have engaged themselves in such an illegal activities. 5. Upon consideration of the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the parties, more so, in view of the fact that no specific allegation is made against the petitioner neither in the FIR nor in the statement of the witnesses, this Court enlarges 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, Barpeta under the following conditions: 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. Page No.# 3/3 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