Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010122582026 2026:GAU-AS:9683 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1644/2026 SRI SONDEEP DUTTA S/O. LATE JYOTIRMOY DUTTA, RESIDENT OF VILL- SRIKONA PART-I, P.S.- SILCHAR, DIST- CACHAR, ASSAM, PIN-78001 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S C BISWAS, MS. J GHOSH,MS. U NANDA,MS. K L R YANTHAN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER Date : 16-07-2026 Heard Mr. S. C. Biswas, learned counsel for the accused applicant and Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This is an application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for granting bail to the accused applicant, who was arrested on 01.05.2026, in connection with G. R. Case No. 643/2026 arising out of Silchar P.S. Case No. Page No.# 2/3 390/2026 under Sections 296/3(5)/316(2)/318(4)/351(2) of the BNS, 2023 added Section 112(2) of the BNS, 2023 read with Sections 21/22/23 of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019. 3. An FIR was filed on 28.04.2026 by one Zahangir Alom Ahmed, a resident of Silchar, alleging that the accused persons named in the FIR had induced him and many others to invest certain amounts of money on the promise of providing huge returns. It was alleged that the accused persons had defrauded him and several others and that the amount involved is Rs. 37,80,000/-. It was further alleged that, since no returns were paid by the accused persons, the instant FIR was lodged by the informant. 4. On receipt of the FIR, the Police registered Silchar P.S. Case No. 390/2026 under the aforementioned sections. 5. During the course of investigation, the present accused applicant, who is the brother of one of the accused persons named in the FIR, was arrested on 01.05.2026 and since then he is behind bars for the last 77 days. 6. Mr. Biswas, learned counsel for the accused applicant, submits that the mandatory period of detention without filing any final report or charge-sheet has already expired, as none of the penal sections mentioned in the FIR provides for detention beyond 60 days without filing a charge-sheet. In view of the aforesaid, he submits that this is a fit case wherein the accused applicant should be granted default bail. 7. Mr. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, has produced the Case Diary before this Court and the same has been perused. 8. Taking into account the submissions made by the learned counsel for the accused applicant and upon perusal of the Case Diary, it is found that the Page No.# 3/3 statutory period of 60 days of detention has already expired in respect of the accused applicant. Therefore, he is entitled to be released on default bail. 9. Accordingly, it is directed that the accused applicant shall be released on default bail forthwith upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Silchar, subject to the following conditions: i. That the accused applicant shall cooperate with the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required; ii. That the accused applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts before the Investigating Authority against the accused applicant; and iii. That the accused applicant shall not try to hamper or tamper with the investigation in any manner whatsoever. 10. In view of the aforesaid directions, the instant bail application is, accordingly, disposed of as allowed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant