Mollah Jakir Hussain And Anr vs. The State Of Assam

Held

The Court considered the submissions from both sides and perused the case diary. The Court noted that documents relating to various bank accounts and substantial amounts therein were recovered, the sources of which could not be properly explained by the accused applicants. Furthermore, the investigation in the matter was still ongoing. Consequently, the Court found no merit in the bail application. The Court's reasoning emphasizes the unexplained sources of funds and the ongoing investigation as grounds for denying bail. The ratio decidendi is that in cases involving allegations of cyber fraud with unexplained financial transactions and ongoing investigations, bail may be denied. The operative direction was the rejection of the bail application.

Facts

This case involves a bail application filed by Mollah Jakir Hussain and Martinul Hoque. The applicants were arrested on June 19, 2026, in connection with Boko P.S. Case No. 175/2026, registered under various sections of the BNS and the Information Technology Act. An FIR was lodged alleging cyber-related fraudulent activities. During a raid on Mollah Jakir Hussain's house, incriminating materials were recovered, including mobile phones containing multiple Gmail accounts, bank accounts, cheque books, and documents. The applicants allegedly used an application called "Gold Go" for virtual coin and USDT transactions, with substantial balances reflected in their accounts, the sources of which they could not satisfactorily explain. The prosecution also highlighted the recovery of documents related to a current account in the name of "Milan Enterprise," for which the applicants allegedly lacked business records, GST trade license, and supporting documents.

Key Issues

1. Whether the accused applicants are entitled to bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, considering the allegations of cyber fraud and the recovery of incriminating materials? (Question of law) Petitioner's Arguments: - The accused were arrested solely on suspicion, and no victim has been identified to date. - The applicants have been in custody since June 19, 2026. - Accused applicant No. 1 operates a common service center with a trade license, and accused No. 2 assists him. - A co-accused has already been granted bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kamrup (Amingaon). - Therefore, the applicants should be granted bail. Revenue/State's Arguments: - There are sufficient incriminating materials against the accused regarding cyber frauds and transactions beyond their resources. - Documents related to "Milan Enterprise" were recovered, but the applicants could not produce business records, GST trade license, or supporting documents for this entity. - These documents were allegedly used for unlawful business transactions. - As the investigation is ongoing, bail should not be granted at this stage.