Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010202702026 2026:GAU-AS:14477 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2807/2026 RUBUL ALI SON OF AHMED ALI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE LOHARKATHA, P.O. MUKALMUA, P.S. MUKALMUA, DISTRICT NALBARI, ASSAM, PIN 781126 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A SARMA, MR. LENTSO,MR. M HUSSAIN,MR. K KALITA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER 29.09.2026 Heard Mr. A. Sarma, learned counsel for the accused and Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. This application, under Section 483 of the BNSS, is preferred by accused, namely, Rubul Ali, who has been languishing in jail hazot, since 05.09.2026, in connection with the Mukalmua PS Case No. 140/2026, under Sections 319(2)/ 318(4)/ 308(6)/ 308(7)/ 317(4)/ 112/ 61(2)(a)/ 351(2)/ 351(3)/ 3(5)/ 3(6)/ 3(8)/ 3(9) of the BNS, for granting bail. Page No.# 2/3 3. It is to be noted here that the aforementioned case has been registered on the basis of one FIR, lodged by SI Dipak Barkakati of Mukalmua Police Station, on 05.09.2026. 3.1. The essence of allegation made in the FIR dated 05.09.2026, is that one Ashik Ali; Iftikar Ali @ Xaru; Rubul Ali; Nazrul Ali; and others, functioning as a group and gang, in conspiracy with one another and with unknown others, in furtherance of common intention and common object, in the area around the precincts of Mukalmua Police Station, by deceit and personating as Advocates and Officials, extorting money and cheating public. They often, by stopping people near the police station, forced the parties to settle the dispute and thereby they obtained money from them and also threatened them for false criminal prosecution. 4. Mr. Sarma, learned counsel for the accused, submits that the accused was arrested on 05.09.2026 and since then he has been languishing in jail hazot for last 25 days. Mr. Sarma further submits that though the present accused is named in the FIR, yet the allegation against him is not specific and the same is general in nature and that he is ready to cooperate with the investigating agency and therefore, it is contended to allow the petition. 5. Per-contra, Mr. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, by producing the case diary before this Court, vehemently opposed the petition on the ground that the IO has collected sufficient incriminating materials against the accused. 6. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties, this Court has carefully gone through the petition as well as the documents placed on record and also perused the case diary with the assistance Page No.# 3/3 of learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 7. It appears that the accused was arrested on 05.09.2026 and since then, he has been languishing in jail hazot for last 25 days. Further, perusal of the case diary reveals that the IO has achieved substantial progress in the investigation. 8. Having considered the above facts and circumstances and also considering the period of detention and balancing the same with the nature and gravity of the offence alleged in the FIR, this Court is of the view that further custodial detention of the accused may not be warranted, in the interest of investigation. 9. Accordingly, it is provided that on furnishing a bond of Rs. 25,000/- only, with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalbari, the accused be enlarged on bail. 10. In terms of above, this bail application stands disposed of. 11. The case diary be returned. JUDGE Comparing Assistant