Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010154722026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2077/2026 SAHID ALI AND 2 ORS SON OF HAZARAT ALIAS HAJARAT ALI, RESIDENT OF SUNDARPUR, BUDUCHAR, POLICE STATION MATIA, DISTRICT GOALPARA, ASSAM 783125. 2: ABUL KALAM SON OF ABDUR RAHIM ALIAS ROHIM PERMANENT RESIDENT OF BASANTAPUR NC POLICE STATION GOALPARA RIVER POLICE STATION DISTRICT POLICE STATION DISTRICT GOALPARA ASSAM-783125 AND PRESENTLY RESIDING AT BUDUCHAR HATKHOLA POLICE STATION MATIA 3: MINARUL ISLAM SON OF LATE DANESH ALI RESIDENT OF BUDUCHAR POLICE STATION MATIA DISTRICT GOALPARA ASSAM-783125 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. DITUL DAS, MS TINLUNG,MR. B J TALUKDAR Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 28.07.2026 Heard Mr. D. Das, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Ms. S.H. Bora, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. By this application, the petitioners have prayed for bail in connection with Matia P.S. Case No. 63/2026 registered under Sections 120(B)/420/406/506 of the IPC, 1860. The FIR by which the petitioners were arrayed as accused persons were lodged on 16.06.2026 by one Rezak Ali stating inter alia that the petitioners along with others have promised to sale a plot of land to the informant and that pursuance thereof, sale deeds were executed between the informant and the accused persons including the petitioners. It is also alleged that the informant had paid the entire amount towards consideration for sale of the said land. However, the informant stated that the petitioners along with others have not given him the possession of the said land and that he was further threatened by the petitioners and others not to put further pressure on the matter. It is as such alleged by the informant that he was cheated by the petitioners and others. 3. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are not the owners of the said land and the said fact was known by the informant and yet informant had entered into the sale deed with the petitioners and the same shows that the story is not correct. 4. Ms. S.H. Bora, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State however submits that the ingredients of cheating is writ large in the said FIR and as such has prayed that no bail should be granted to the petitioners and has prayed for Page No.# 3/3 calling of the Case Diary. 5. Upon consideration of the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the parties, more so, due to the fact that the informant had executed sale deeds with the petitioners, who were not owners of the said plot of land, even after having knowledge that they are not the owners, this Court finds it fit to release the petitioners on bail on furnishing of bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- each with one local surety each of the like amount to the satisfaction of CJM, Goalpara under the following conditions: i) the petitioners will appear before the Investigating Officer as and when call for. ii) the petitioners will not hamper, tamper with the evidence, neither influence the witnesses connected with the case. iii) the petitioners will not leave the place of jurisdiction without the permission of the said Court i.e. CJM, Goalpara. 6. Petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant