Shariful Islam and Anr. v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC1 Jun 2026Bail Appln./1383/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gauhati High Court 2026 bail order under Section 483 BNSS 2023 granting bail in cyber fraud case (Barpeta Road P.S. Case No. 32/2026, G.R. No. 362/2026; Ss.61(2)(a)/318(4)/316(2)/336(3) BNS r/w Ss.66(C)/66(D) IT Act 2000). Points: production before Magistrate within 24 hours; apprehension 14.04.2026 vs formal arrest shown 15.04.2026 (Annexure-4); 48 days custody; bail Rs.30,000 each with surety; conditions incl. fortnightly appearance before I.O.; Judge Susmita Phukan Khaund; dated 02.06.2026.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to both petitioners: enlargement on bail of Rs.30,000/- each with one surety each of like amount, subject to satisfaction of the learned CJM, Barpeta and conditions (i)-(iv); on breach of any condition the bail order shall stand cancelled; bail application disposed of. ¶¶33

Shariful Islam and Anr. Vs the State of Assam — Gauhati HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶33

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners, behind bars since 15.04.2026 in connection with Barpeta Road P.S. Case No. 32/2026 (cyber fraud), are entitled to be enlarged on bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023. +1 more

¶¶18

Court's answer

With the petitioners behind bars for 48 days and the investigation presumably having progressed to some extent, further custodial detention of the petitioners may not be required.

¶¶24

Ratio / Principle

On the record (Annexure-4), the petitioners were apprehended by the Police on 14.04.2026 but were shown as formally arrested on 15.04.2026.

¶¶20

Key takeaways

The petitioners are to be enlarged on bail of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) each with one surety each of like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the learned CJM, Barpeta.ratio¶¶25
Bail is subject to stringent conditions, including that the petitioners refrain from the alleged activities, appear before the I.O. every fortnight till completion of the investigation, not tamper with evidence, and not leave the Court's jurisdiction without prior permission.ratio¶¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted under S.483 BNSS, 2023 — Gauhati High Court (Susmita Phukan Khaund, J.), order dated 02.06.2026 in Bail Appln./1383/2026: Shariful Islam and Mazidul Islam, local residents in custody since 15.04.2026 (48 days) in Barpeta Road P.S. Case No. 32/2026, G.R. No. 362/2026, under Ss.61(2)(a)/318(4)/316(2)/336(3) BNS r/w Ss.66(C)/66(D) IT Act, 2000 (arrest in connection with cyber fraud), enlarged on bail of Rs.30,000/- each with one surety each of like amount, subject to satisfaction of the learned CJM, Barpeta. Conditions: refrain from the alleged activities; appearance before the I.O. every fortnight till completion of investigation; no tampering with evidence; no leaving the Court's jurisdiction without prior permission; breach entails cancellation of bail. Court noted per Annexure-4 that the petitioners were apprehended on 14.04.2026 but shown as formally arrested on 15.04.2026, and that further custodial detention appeared unnecessary.

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010104552026

2026:GAU-AS:7657

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

¶5

Case No. : Bail Appln./1383/2026

¶6

SHARIFUL ISLAM AND ANR S/O. MAINUDDIN,

¶7

2: MAZIDUL ISLAM S/O. LATE MONZIL HOQUE

¶8

BOTH ARE RESIDENT OF CHENGULIA P.S. BARPETA ROAD DISTRICT BARPETA ASSA

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶11

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S C BISWAS, MS. K L R YANTHAN,MR. F A HASSAN

¶12

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,

¶13

Page No.# 2/4

¶14

BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND

¶15

ORDER

¶16

02.06.2026

¶17

Heard Mr. S.C. Biswas, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. F.A Hassan, learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶18

This application has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraskha Sanhita, 2023, whereby the petitioners namely, Shariful Islam and Mazidul Islam , have prayed for bail as they are behind bars since 15.04.2026 in connection with Barpeta Road P.S Case No. 32/2026, corresponding to G.R No.362/2026 registered under Section 61(2)(a) /318(4) /316(2)/336(3) of BNS, R/W Section 66(C)/66(D) IT Act, 2000 .

¶19

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that their right to personal liberty has been curtailed as they were not produced before the learned Magistrate within 24 hours after they were apprehended by the Police on 14.04.2026.

¶20

Annexure-4 clearly reveals that the petitioners were apprehended by the Police on 14.04.2026 but they were shown as formally arrested on 15.04.2026.

¶21

Mr. B. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State is present and has raised objection to the prayer of bail made by the petitioners.

¶22

Page No.# 3/4

¶23

I have considered the submissions at the Bar with circumspection.

¶24

The petitioners have been behind bars for 48 days. Presumably, the investigation may have progressed to some extent. It appears that further custodial detention of the petitioners may not be required. The petitioners were arrested in connection with cyber fraud. The petitioners are local residents and they have undertaken to abide by any stringent bail conditions, if imposed upon them.

¶25

Considering the entire aspect of the matter, the above-named petitioners shall be enlarged on bail of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) each with one surety each of like amount subject to the satisfaction of the learned CJM, Barpeta with following conditions:

¶26

(i) the petitioners shall refrain from such activities with which they are alleged;

¶27

(ii) the petitioners shall appear before the I.O on every fortnight, till completion of the investigation;

¶28

(iii) the petitioners shall not tamper with the evidence; and

¶29

(iv) the petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission.

¶30