DHARMESWAR ROY ALIAS JITU ROY v. THE STATE OF ASSAM
Bail Appln./1362/2026 · 2026-06-18
Sanjeev Kumar Sharma
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 8601 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 8601 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010102952026
2026:GAU-AS:8879
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1362/2026 DHARMESWAR ROY ALIAS JITU ROY S/O JAGAT DIGAT ROY ALIAS JAGATDIPEN ROY,R/O. VILLAGE MUKUNDAPUR,NEAR POWER HOUSE,P.S. BAIHATA CHARIALI,DISTRICT KAMRUP (M), ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE P.P, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S MUNIR, MS. N.A. BEGUM,MR. T HUSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER 19.06.2026
1. Heard Mr. S. Munir, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. D. P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam.
2. By this petition under Section 483 BNSS, the accused-petitioner, namely, Dharmeswar Roy @ Jitu Roy who was arrested on 15.05.2026 in connection with Barpeta PS Case No. 159/2026 under Section 61(2)/319(2)/318(4)/316(2)/336(3) of BNS.
3. The allegation against the petitioner is that, by posing himself as an employee of the Assam Secretariat Health Department, he represented to the informant-victim that he could secure employment for her in a Government job. Accordingly, the informant paid large sums of money into the accounts of different persons and was also shown a fake selection list. Ultimately, the informant did not obtain any employment, and the petitioner swindled her of a total amount of Rs. 12,50,000/-.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that having regard to the period of detention of 35 days, further custody may not be required.
5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor with reference to the case diary submits that there is sufficient incriminating material against the petitioners, who were involved in several other cases of similar nature involving duping of job seeking candidates.
Page No.# 3/3
6. Having regard to the nature of the allegation and the gravity of the offence, the prayer for bail stands rejected at this stage.
7. Petition stands disposed of.
8. Send back the case diary.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant