Allowed¶27

Sri Amit Jalali v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC29 Oct 2025AB/1454/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gauhati High Court; AB/1454/2025; 30.10.2025; Parthivjyoti Saikia; Amit Jalali; Section 483 BNSS 2023; Crime Branch P.S. Case No.13/2024; Sections 178 179 180 308 316 318 336 340 351 61 BNS 2023; bail application allowed; interim bail made absolute; no clear allegation in FIR; cooperation with Investigating Officer; detention only for proper investigation; case diary returned; Sunny Breza; Prontastic I.T. Services Pvt. Ltd.; Arjun Singh Mehta; Advashi Welfare and Development Council; K.K. Das; B.P. Borah

What did the court decide?

Bail application of Sri Amit Jalali allowed; interim bail made absolute (petitioner need not be detained in custody); case diary to be returned. ¶27

Sri Amit Jalali Vs the State of Assam — Bail and Remand | Gauhati HC (2025)

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010137562025

2025:GAU-AS:14577

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶5

Case No. : AB/1454/2025

¶6

SRI AMIT JALALI S/O LATE INDER KRISHEN JALALI

¶7

R/O FLAT NO. .803 TOWER CAPE GOLD 5, SUPER TECH CAPE TOWN, NEAR NORTH EYE SECTOR, 74, NOIDA, GOUTAM BUDHA NAGAR, UTTAR PRADESH- 201301, PH. NO. 8586939939.

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A M BORA, MR A TEWARI,MR T THAKURIA

¶11

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. ARIF AHMED (INFORMANT),MR P J DUTTA(INFORMANT),MR B P BORAH(INFORMANT)

¶12

:: BEFORE ::

¶13

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

30.10.2025

¶16

Heard Mr. A.M. Bora, the learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. A. Tiwari,

¶17

Page No.# 2/3

¶18

learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Das, the learned addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam as well as Mr. B.P. Borah, the learned counsel for the informant.

¶19

2. This is an application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 in respect of Crime Branch P.S. Case No.13/2024 under Sections 178/179/180/308/316/318/336/340/351 and 61 of BNS, 2023.

¶20

3. The informant represents a company called Prontastic I.T. Services Pvt. Ltd. This company is associated with another company named M/s. Aieze Vertex Pvt. Ltd. which is represented by another person called Mr. Arjun Singh Mehta. This company of Mr. Arjun Singh Mehta was to provide video conferencing links to the company of Mr. Sunny Breza.

¶21

4. The informant Sunny Breza had come to know that Advashi Welfare and Development Council in Assam was going to issue a large order for supply of goods. It may be mentioned that the company of Mr. Arjun Singh Mehta along with another person named Sri Amit Jalali, the present petitioner were already doing business in the State of Assam. Therefore, Mr. Sunny Breza came in contact with the present petitioner so that he can have some business in the State of Assam. Mr. Sunny Breza came to Assam and met some other people. Those people took him to the house of a Minister. Some persons claiming to be high ranking officers of Assam Government, told Mr. Sunny Breza to supply bed sheets worth ₹1.2 crore. No formal work order was issued in favour of Mr. Sunny Breza. Even then, he supplied bed sheets worth ₹1.2 crore to the Advashi Development Corporation Ware House at Changsari. It may also be mentioned that for getting the work, Mr. Sunny Breza had to pay money to different persons including the present petitioner. He claimed that he paid an amount of ₹80 lakhs in the bank account of Arjun Singh Mehta. But Mr. Sunny Breza is yet to receive his dues. Some other materials show that the company of Mr. Sunny Breza was to pay an amount of ₹45 lakhs to the company of Mr. Arjun Singh Mehta. In the

¶22

Page No.# 3/3

¶23

FIR itself, it has been mentioned that the many that has been paid to Mr. Mehta was nothing but a business transaction.

¶24

5. The aforesaid facts clearly show that the allegation against the present petitioner is not clear. In fact, no clear allegation is made against the present petitioner.

¶25

6. The present petitioner has already appeared before the Investigating Officer and his statement has already been recorded.

¶26

7. In a criminal case, a person is required to be arrested and detained only for the purpose of proper investigation of a case. Here, in this case, the petitioner has been co-operating with the Investigating Officer in the investigation of the case. There is no clear allegation against the present petitioner in the FIR itself.

¶27

8. For the aforesaid reasons, the present petitioner Sri Amit Jalali need not be detained in custody. His bail application is allowed. The interim bail granted to Sri Amit Jalali is made absolute.

¶28

With the above direction, the bail application is disposed of.

¶29

Case Diary shall be returned.

¶30

JUDGE

¶31

Comparing Assistant

Sri Amit Jalali v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Amit Jalali v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abdul Barek Vs the State of Assam

Sailen Talukdar Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Raizuddin Vs the State of Assam

Pankaj Sanitation and Anr. Vs Shree Timber Products Pvt. Ltd. and 4 Ors.

Sampak Kakati Vs the State of Assam

Asar Uddin Vs the State of Assam