Allowed

Samidul Mandal v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC14 Sept 2026Bail Appln./2741/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a bail application where the petitioner challenged the vague FIR allegations. The court observed that no specific allegations were made against the petitioner. Consequently, the court granted bail by enlarging the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was enlarged on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000 with one local surety under specified conditions.

Samidul Mandal Vs the State of Assam — Narcotics (NDPS) | Gauhati HC (2026)

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010201112026

undefined

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

¶5

Case No. : Bail Appln./2741/2026

¶6

SAMIDUL MANDAL

¶7

S/O NURUL MANDAL, R/O VILL. GHORAMARA, P.S. DIST. KOKRAJHAR, ASSAM, PIN-783370.

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY PP, ASSAM.

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS D DAS, MS K TAYE

¶11

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,

¶12

BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Date : 15.09.2026

¶15

Heard Ms. D. Das, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶16

By this application, the petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Kokrajhar P.S. Case No. 138/2026 registered under Sections 317(4)/317(1)/112/318(4)/ 318(1)/ 319(2)/ 319(1)/308(6)/ 308(1)/ 308(7)/

¶17

Page No.# 2/3

¶18

61(2)(a) /351(2) /351(3) /3(5) /3(6) /3(8) /3(9) of BNS, 2023. The FIR in connection with which the petitioner has prayed for bail was lodged on 05.09.2026 by the police personnel of Kokrajhar Police Station stating inter alia that the petitioner as well as some other persons holding no office, no authority and no professional qualification of any kind use to stay in and around the Police Station and they intercept the persons who come to the Police Station inquired, prepares the complaint or speaks to them regarding settlement at times they threatened also, the person who come to the Police Station and also takes money from them.

¶19

The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that allegations narrated in the FIR are vague and no specific allegation is made against the petitioner, who is arrayed at serial no.4 in the said FIR.

¶20

Mr. B. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, however, submits that the Case Diary be called for in order to see the entire gamut of the case.

¶21

Upon consideration of the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the parties, more so, in view of the fact that that no specific allegations were made against the petitioner and further there are no statements of any victim, this Court deems it fit to enlarge the petitioner on bail on furnishing of bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of CJM, Kokrajhar, under the following conditions:

¶22

i) the petitioner will appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for.

¶23

ii) the petitioner will not hamper, tamper with the evidence, neither

¶24

Page No.# 3/3

¶25

influence the witnesses connected with the case.

¶26

iii) the petitioner will not leave the place of jurisdiction without the permission of the concerned Court.

¶27

6. Petition is disposed of.

¶28

JUDGE

¶29

Comparing Assistant

Samidul Mandal v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Samidul Mandal 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases