Allowed

Majidul Hoque v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC13 Sept 2026Bail Appln./2705/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court allowed a bail application filed by Majidul Hoque under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023. The petitioner was in custody in connection with a FIR registered under the BNS, 2023 regarding extortion and assault. After hearing both the counsel and the Public Prosecutor, the Court considered the period of detention and the nature of allegations. Bail was granted subject to a bond, t

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on furnishing a bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties of the like amount, subject to specific conditions and satisfaction of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge.

Majidul Hoque Vs the State of Assam — Bail and Remand | Gauhati HC (2026)

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010196222026

2026:GAU-AS:13546

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

¶5

Case No. : Bail Appln./2705/2026

¶6

MAJIDUL HOQUE

¶7

S/O TUJAMMAL HOQUE, R/O VILL BAMUNDONGRA, PS BAGHBAR, PO HABIDUNGRA, PIN 781308, DIST BARPETA, ASSAM, INDIA

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. I H SAIKIA, MR. K KALITA

¶11

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,

¶12

B E F O R E

¶13

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA

¶14

ORDER

¶15

14.09.2026

¶16

Heard Mr. I H Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. S H

¶17

Bora, learned Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.

¶18

2. This is an application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, for grant of

¶19

Page No.# 2/4

¶20

regular bail to the accused-petitioner, namely Majidul Hoque, who is in custody since 26.07.2026, in connection with Hatigaon P.S. Case No. 151/2026, registered under Sections 351(2) /308(5) /308(2) /127(2)/61(2) of the BNS, 2023.

¶21

3. The brief facts of the prosecution case, as revealed from the FIR, are that the informants lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-Charge, Hatigaon Police Station alleging, inter alia, that they had arrived at Guwahati from Badarpur by train on 23.07.2026 in connection with their business and were staying at a hotel in Paltan Bazar. It is alleged that one Burhan Uddin Khan, an associate of the informants, along with two unknown persons, took them to Friends Inn Lodge situated at Hatigaon, where they were allegedly wrongfully confined, physically assaulted, and threatened to pay a sum of Rs. 30,00,000/-. According to the FIR, out of fear for their lives, the informants transferred an amount of Rs. 6,81,700/- through online transactions from different bank accounts and further agreed to pay the remaining amount through hawala. It is further alleged that when the complainant’s brother, Didarul Haque Barlaskar, went to deliver the hawala amount, the police apprehended two persons, namely, Rabiul Haque and Kishan Saha, who are alleged to be the aforesaid unknown persons involved in the commission of the offence. On the basis of the said FIR,

¶22

Page No.# 3/4

¶23

Hatigaon P.S Case No. 151/2026 was registered under the above-mentioned provisions of law and investigation commenced.

¶24

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is not an FIRnamed accused and that the co-accused of the case has been granted interim pre-arrest bail by order dated 03.08.2026, passed in AB 1750/2026. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody for 51 days.

¶25

5. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the CD may be called for. However, having regard to the period of detention, the nature of the allegations, and the fact that the petitioner has already been interrogated, this Court is of the view that the prayer for bail can be considered at this stage. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is allowed on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of the like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 5, Kamrup(M), Guwahati, and subject to the following conditions:

¶26

(i) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required and shall cooperate with the investigation;

¶27

(ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses; and

¶28

(iii) The petitioner shall not commit any similar offence while on bail.

¶29

Page No.# 4/4

¶30

6. The petition stands disposed of as allowed.

¶31

JUDGE

¶32

Comparing Assistant

Majidul Hoque v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Majidul Hoque v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases