Allowed¶35

Enamul Hoque v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC13 Jul 2026Bail Appln./1661/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gauhati High Court; Bail Appln./1661/2026; Enamul Hoque v. The State of Assam; Justice Anjan Moni Kalita; decided 14-07-2026; neutral citation 2026:GAU-AS:9584; Section 483 BNSS 2023; Sections 318(4)/316(2) BNS 2023; Section 14 Assam Game and Betting Act; Kalgachia P.S. Case No. 54/2026; IPL betting/gambling; bail granted; implication on co-accused statement; investigation near completion; bail bond Rs. 50,000; conditions imposed.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted: accused applicant to be released forthwith on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barpeta, subject to four conditions (cooperation with investigation; no inducement/threat/promise to witnesses; no online gambling or betting activity; no hampering or tampering with investigation).

Enamul Hoque Vs the State of Assam — Cheating and Forgery | Gauhati HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶35

Issue for consideration

Whether the accused applicant, arrested on 13.06.2026 in Kalgachia P.S. Case No. 54/2026 (Sections 318(4)/316(2) BNS, 2023 r/w Section 14 Assam Game and Betting Act), should be released on bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023.

¶16

Court's answer

Considering the period of detention already undergone by the accused applicant and the stage of the investigation (investigation on the verge of completion, relevant documents and materials already seized and recovered, implication resting on the statement of co-accused Sri Dewan Jeherul), the further custodial detention of the accused applicant may not be required.

¶27

Ratio / Principle

The accused applicant shall be released on bail forthwith upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barpeta, subject to conditions: cooperation with investigation and appearance before the Investigating Officer as required; no inducement, threat or promise to dissuade any person from disclosing facts; no indulgence in online gambling and betting; and no hampering or tampering with the investigation.

¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 granted to an accused implicated solely on the statement of co-accused Sri Dewan Jeherul in Kalgachia P.S. Case No. 54/2026 (Sections 318(4)/316(2) of the BNS, 2023 read with Section 14 of the Assam Game and Betting Act), arising from alleged illegal betting/gambling during the IPL. The Court noted that the relevant documents and materials had already been seized and recovered and that the investigation was on the verge of completion; considering the period of detention undergone since arrest on 13.06.2026 and the stage of investigation, further custodial detention was held not required. Release ordered on a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the CJM, Barpeta, subject to conditions including cooperation with the investigation, abstention from online gambling/betting, and non-tampering with the investigation.

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010126202026

2026:GAU-AS:9584

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

¶5

Case No. : Bail Appln./1661/2026

¶6

ENAMUL HOQUE

¶7

S/O MOTIUR RAHMAN MATIYAR, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE HALDHIAGAON, P.S. KALGACHIA, DISTRICT BARPETA, ASSAM.

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S A AHMED, MR. F A AHMED

¶11

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,

¶12

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Date : 14-07-2026

¶15

Heard Mr. S. A. Ahmed, learned counsel for the accused applicant and Mr. D. P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶16

This is an application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of bail to the accused applicant, who has been arrested on 13.06.2026 in connection with Kalgachia P.S. Case No. 54/2026 under Sections 318(4)/316(2)

¶17

Page No.# 2/4

¶18

of the BNS, 2023 read with Section 14 of the Assam Game and Betting Act.

¶19

The gist of the case is that on 31.05.2026, the complainant, namely, SI Jitul Das of Kalgachia Police Station, lodged an FIR before Kalgachia Police Station alleging that at about 8:30 A.M., credible information was received from a reliable source regarding ongoing illegal betting and gambling during the Indian Premier League (IPL) through mobile phones at Kharisala Bazar area. It was alleged that, acting upon such information, the police team proceeded to the place of occurrence and conducted a raid and search at the house of the one Dewan Jeherul . During the raid and search, the police recovered a couple of mobile phones along with debit cards of various banks in the names of different persons. After recovery of those materials and on receiving further information, the police raided another place, namely, a rented flat at Green Hillside Apartment, Basistha, Guwahati and recovered several debit cards belonging to different persons.

¶20

Upon receipt of the FIR, the police registered Kalgachia P.S. Case No. 54/2026 under the aforementioned sections.

¶21

During the course of investigation, the present accused applicant came to be implicated on the basis of the statement of one Sri Dewan Jeherul . Consequently, the accused applicant was arrested on 13.06.2026 and since then he is behind the bars.

¶22

Mr. Ahmed, learned counsel for the accused applicant, submits that the accused applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case solely on the basis of the statement of co-accused Sri Dewan Jeherul . He further submits that no incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the accused applicant and that the investigation is almost complete. It is further

¶23

Page No.# 3/4

¶24

submitted that the accused applicant has remained in custody since 13.06.2026 and that his further custodial detention is not required. Accordingly, he prays that the accused applicant be granted bail.

¶25

Per contra, Mr. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, submits that there are sufficient incriminating materials indicating the involvement of the accused applicant. He further submits that the investigation is still in progress and that the role of all persons involved is yet to be fully investigated. Therefore, custodial interrogation of the accused applicant is necessary and accordingly, he opposes the prayer for grant of bail.

¶26

The case diary in the instant case has been received and I have carefully perused the same along with the materials available on record.

¶27

This Court has considered the entire facts and circumstances of the case. It appears from the Case Diary that the accused applicant came to be implicated during the course of investigation on the basis of the statement of co-accused Sri Dewan Jeherul . The relevant documents and materials have already been seized and recovered by the police and the investigation is on the verge of completion. Considering the period of detention already undergone by the accused applicant and the stage of the investigation, this Court is of the opinion that his further custodial detention may not be required.

¶28

Accordingly, it is directed that the accused applicant shall be released on 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, Barpeta, subject to the following conditions:

¶29

i. That the accused applicant shall cooperate with the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when

¶30

Page No.# 4/4

¶31

required;

¶32

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;

¶33

iii. That the accused applicant shall not indulge in any activity relating to online gambling and betting; and

¶34

iv. That the accused applicant shall not try to hamper or tamper with the investigation in any manner whatsoever.

¶35

In view of the aforesaid directions, the instant bail application is, accordingly, disposed of as allowed.

¶36

JUDGE

¶37

Comparing Assistant

Enamul Hoque v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Enamul Hoque 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

Sri Minarul Hoque Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Habibar Rahman and Ors. Vs the State of Assam

Habibur Rahman Alias Haji Vs the State of Assam

Abul Hussain Laskar Vs Mahiuddin Laskar

Shri Dipjyoti Kharikary Vs the Union of India and Anr.

Kamal Miyan and Anr. Vs the State of Assam