Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010043332026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/565/2026 RAKIBUL HUSSAIN S/O.- ABDUSH SALAM, RESIDENT OF- VILLAGE- TEKELIPUTA, P.S. -SAMAGURI, DISTRICT - NAGAON, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR.ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N C DAS, MR. H.K. DEORI,MR R ALOM,MR. S K SINGHA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER Date : 06-04-2026 Heard Mr. N.C Das, learned counsel for the petitioner also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Addl. P.P appearing for the State. The accused/petitioner, namely Rakibul Hussain is invoking the powers under section 482 of BNSS, 2023 praying for the grant of pre-arrest bail in Page No.# 2/3 connection with Uluani P.S Case No. 55/2025 u/s 61(2)/318(4)/316(2)/336(4)/3(5) of BNS, 2023. The earlier bail petition was filed on behalf of the petitioner which was rejected on 19.12.2025 in AB No. 2783 of 2025. Though, it was allowed with regard to co-accused, Nasir Uddin Ahmed, for the reason indicated in paragraph-3 of the said order. The FIR dated 15.09.2025 names five accused persons including petitioner No. 1. The gist of the allegations is that the accused persons obtained Adhaar Cards of several persons and using them they took out numerous SIM Cards, some of which are suspected to be used in illegal activities. Mr. N. C Das, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused/petitioner is having some health problems due to the tension with regard to the instant case; all the alleged materials have already been recovered and that granting of bail to him in this case may not hamper investigation. The learned counsel for the petitioner refers to a decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kamaljit Singh -versus- State of Punjab & Another, reported in (2005) 7 SCC 226. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on the ground of parity, the bail petition of the present petitioner should be considered. Five persons are named in the FIR. The present petitioner named is not in the FIR. In this context, the learned counsel submits that some of them have been released on bail by this court and some by the learned court below. The learned Addl. P.P submits that there are no sufficient grounds in this subsequent petition and that the incriminating materials have been recovered from the shop of the present petitioner. Page No.# 3/3 It is submitted by the prosecution that from the investigation materials it has been revealed that with regard to a single Aadhar card, multiple SIM cards were activated and that the same has been supported by the statements of witnesses also. I have perused the relevant portions of the Case Diary. The seizure witnesses have supported about the seizure of the materials from the shop AR Enterprises which is owned by the present petitioner. The witnesses have also stated about the finding that multiple SIM cards have been activated on the basis of SIM and Aadhar card and later when they tried to apprehend the culprit, some of them ran away. Considering the materials revealed and as the investigation is not yet completed, it may not be prudent to grant anticipatory bail to the accused/petitioner at this stage In such view of the matter, I am unable to find sufficient new grounds in this subsequent petition, which also accordingly stand rejected, at this stage. Return back the CD. JUDGE Comparing Assistant