Rabbul Al Amin Vs the State of Assam — Bail and Remand | Gauhati HC (2026)

Rabbul Al Amin Vs the State of Assam — Bail and Remand | Gauhati HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Bail granted on bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) with one surety of like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the learned Elaka Magistrate, with conditions: (i) appearance before the I.O. on every fortnight till completion of investigation; (ii) refraining from the alleged activities; (iii) no tampering with evidence and no threats to or influencing of witnesses; bail to stand cancelled on breach of any condition.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, in custody since 22.05.2026 in connection with Kalgachia P.S Case No. 50/2026 (Ss. 61(2)/318(4)/319(2)/316(2)/3(5) BNS), is entitled to bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraskha Sanhita, 2023.

Court's answer

Investigation may have presumably progressed and custodial detention may not be required for progress of investigation.

Ratio / Principle

Petitioner allowed to go on bail of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) with one surety of like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the learned Elaka Magistrate.

Key takeaways

Bail condition: petitioner shall appear before the I.O on every fortnight, till completion of investigation.ratio¶¶28
Bail condition: petitioner shall refrain from such activities with which he is alleged.ratio¶¶29
Bail condition: petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence and shall not exercise threats to the witnesses or try to influence them.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail — S.483, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraskha Sanhita, 2023 — petitioner in custody 52 days in Kalgachia P.S Case No. 50/2026 (Ss. 61(2)/318(4)/319(2)/316(2)/3(5), BNS), alleged involvement in cyber crime nexus; SIM cards recovered from his shop at Rampur Bazar; investigation presumably progressed and custodial detention not required — bail granted of Rs.30,000 with one surety of like amount, subject to satisfaction of the learned Elaka Magistrate, on conditions of fortnightly appearance before the I.O. till completion of investigation, refraining from alleged activities, and non-tampering with evidence and non-threatening/influencing of witnesses; breach entails cancellation of bail.

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010142152026

2026:GAU-AS:9552

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

Case No. : Bail Appln./1905/2026

RABBUL AL AMIN

S/O - JAHURUL ALIAS JOHURUL ALIAS JOHIRUL ISLAM R/O - KHELLY, P.S. - KALGACHIA, DISTRICT -BARPETA, ASSAM

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM

, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner : S K PODDAR, MS. N PODDAR,MR. C SHARMA,MR. R GHOSH

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,

Page No.# 2/4

BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND

ORDER

14.07.2026

Heard Mr. S.K. Poddar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. S.H. Borah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

This application has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraskha Sanhita, 2023, whereby the petitioner namely, Rabbul Al Amin , who is stated to have been in custody since 22.05.2026, has prayed for bail in connection with Kalgachia P.S Case No. 50/2026 under Sections 61(2)/318(4)/319(2)/316(2)/3(5) of BNS.

The allegation against the petitioner is that he is involved in a nexus of cyber crime activities around Rampur area along with his associates. Acting upon the said information, a police team of Barbhita O.P lead by O.C Kalgachia PS and police staff conducted a raid and search operation at Khelly village and the petitioner was apprehended. On being led by the petitioner, the police team proceed to his shop located at Rampur Bazar and recovered several SIM cards, which have been mentioned in the FIR.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has raised serious objection stating that the petitioner is involved in a serious offence of cyber crime.

Per contra, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he is not booked under any offence alleging cyber crime. It is submitted that the petitioner has a trade license and he has a business dealing with SIM cards.

Page No.# 3/4

Annexure- 5 and Annexure-6 are the trade license and registration certificates. Annexure-7 is the Income Tax return.

I have considered the submissions at the Bar with circumspection.

I have considered that the petitioner has been behind Bars for 52 days. It appears that investigation may have presumably progressed to some extent. It also appears that custodial detention may not be required for progress of investigation.

It is also submitted that the petitioner is not a flight risk, as he is a local resident. The petitioner is willing to abide by any stringent bail conditions, if imposed upon him.

Considering the entire aspect of the matter, the above-named petitioner is allowed to go on bail of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) only with one surety of like amount subject to the satisfaction of the learned Elaka Magistrate with following conditions:

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

(ii) the petitioner shall refrain from such activities with which he is alleged;

(iii) the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence and shall not exercise threats to the witnesses or try to influence them;

Page No.# 4/4

On breach of any of the bail conditions, bail order shall stand cancelled.

Accordingly, the bail application stands disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant