Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010011252026 2026:GAU-AS:1649 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./203/2026 FARUK ABDULLAH SON OF ABDUL HAKIM RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- AOLATOLI P.S. - LAKHIPUR, P.O.- AOLATALI DISTRICT-GOALPARA, ASSAM VERSUS STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE P.P, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. T J MAHANTA, MR T GOGOI,MR. A BORUA,MS. P BHATTACHARYA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER 09-02-2026 Heard Mr. T. J. Mahanta, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. P. Bhattacharya, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. A. Begum, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, for the State. 2. This is an application filed under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of bail to the petitioner, namely, Faruk Abdullah who has been arrested in connection Page No.# 2/4 with Bijni P.S. Case No. 142/2025 under Sections 303(2)/318(3)/318(4) of BNS, 2023. 3. Case diary not yet received and it is submitted by Ms. Begum, that no intimation has been received from the I.O. as to why the case diary could not be produced before the Court today. 4. Mr. Mahanta, learned Senior Counsel submitted in this regard that the present petitioner is innocent and he is no way connected with the alleged offence. It is only the case against the present petitioner that one of the co-accused, namely, Esop Ali had borrowed his mobile phone and on good faith the petitioner handed over his mobile phone and in the said mobile handset the other co-accused had inserted a Sim Card and the transaction of money was accordingly done by him. 5. He further submitted that from the forwarding report of the present petitioner, it reveals that during the investigation it has come out that only Sim Card was inserted in the mobile handset of the present petitioner and apart from that there is no other involvement of the present petitioner in the alleged offence. 6. Mr. Mahanta, learned Senior Counsel further submitted that the present petitioner is a Higher Secondary student and is only 19 years old and his only mistake was that he handed over his mobile handset to the co-accused person. 7. Ms. A. Begum, learned Addl. PP submitted in this regard that there is no mention about the transaction of money in the forwarding report wherein the allegation is that about Rs.3,00,000/- was withdrawn from the account of the informant. She accordingly submitted that the case diary will reveal the actual fact and as such, she insisted to call for the case diary fixing another date for the same. 8. Mr. Mahanta, learned Senior Counsel submitted in this regard that the co- accused of the case has already been granted bail by the learned Trial Court considering his length of detention, who was the main culprit and the present petitioner is only involved in giving his mobile handset to the other co-accused person. Page No.# 3/4 9. However, the present petitioner is in custody since last 49 days and thus, the I.O. got sufficient opportunity to interrogate him, keeping him in custody and thus, further custodial interrogation may not be required for the purpose of investigation of the case. 10. However, the petitioner is still ready and willing to extend his cooperation in further investigation of the case, if he is granted with the privilege of bail. 11. Hearing the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides, considering the statement made in the forwarding report, wherefrom it reveals that only involvement of the present petitioner was that his mobile handset was used in the alleged transactions by inserting the Sim Card. However, it is also admitted that the petitioner is in custody for last 49 days and thus, the I.O. got sufficient opportunity to interrogate him, keeping him in custody. 12. Considering the entire aspects of the case, specially the length of detention, I find that further custodial interrogation of the petitioner may not be necessary for the interest of investigation and accordingly, I find it a fit case to extend the privilege of bail to the present petitioner. 13. Accordingly, the accused/petitioner, namely, Faruk Abdullah be released on bail in connection with Bijni P.S. Case No. 142/2025 under Sections 303(2)/318(3)/318(4) of BNS, 2023, on furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand) only, with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned SDJM (M), Bijni, Chirang, subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the petitioner shall fully co-operate with the investigation of the case and shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required in connection with the investigation of the aforesaid P.S. Case and (ii) that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of Page No.# 4/4 the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. 14. 14. With the above observation and direction, this bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant