Dianur Islam vs The State Of Assam

Page No.# 1/6
Page No.# 1/6
GAHC010025332026
GAHC010025332026

2026:GAU-AS:2772

2026:GAU-AS:2772
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./409/2026
Case No. : Bail Appln./409/2026
DIANUR ISLAM
SON OF SAIJUDDIN
RESIDENT OF SIMLABARI, P.S. LAKHIPUR, DIST. GOALPARA, ASSAM
DIANUR ISLAM
SON OF SAIJUDDIN
RESIDENT OF SIMLABARI, P.S. LAKHIPUR, DIST. GOALPARA, ASSAM
VERSUS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REP BY THE LEARNED PP, ASSAM
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REP BY THE LEARNED PP, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A M BORA, MR. R BARTHAKUR,MS. C CHOUDHURY,MR.
D K BAIDYA
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A M BORA, MR. R BARTHAKUR,MS. C CHOUDHURY,MR.
D K BAIDYA
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,


BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA
JUDGMENT & ORDER
Date of Hearing : 20.02.2026
JUDGMENT & ORDER
Date of Hearing : 20.02.2026
Date of Judgment: 24.02.2026

Date of Judgment: 24.02.2026

Heard Mr. A. M. Bora, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. D. K. Baidya,
Heard Mr. A. M. Bora, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. D. K. Baidya,
learned counsel appearing for the accused applicant and Mr. R. J. Baruah,
learned counsel appearing for the accused applicant and Mr. R. J. Baruah,
learned Additional Public Prosecutors for the State.
learned Additional Public Prosecutors for the State.

Page No.# 2/6
2 . This is an application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for
granting bail to the accused applicant namely, Dianur Islam , who was arrested
on 29.01.2026, in connection with Basistha P.S. Case No. 42/2026 under Section
147 of the BNS, 2023 read with Sections 15/16/17/18 of the Unlawful Activities
(Prevention) Act, 1967.
3 . The instant case has been initiated based on a written complaint dated
29.01.2026 submitted by SI (P) Chinmoy Boruah of Jorabat Police Out Post,
alleging that on 28.01.2026, at about 17:00 hours, credible information was
received from the Deputy Commissioner of Police (East), Guwahati, regarding
transportation of a large amount of cash suspected to be meant for terrorist
activities, from Guwahati towards Meghalaya in a vehicle bearing Registration
No. AS-01 DL-7386. Acting upon such information, a police team intercepted the
th
vehicle on NH-27 at 9 Mile and apprehended the accused persons, namely
Anowar Hussain, Dianur Islam, Imdadul Haque Sarkar, and Malikuddin Sheikh
(driver). During the search of the vehicle, they recovered cash amounting to Rs.
70,88,000/-, nine (9) cheques amounting to Rs. 43,00,000/-, four mobile
phones, and one land Sale Deed. It was alleged that during the preliminary
enquiry, the accused applicants confessed that the aforesaid money was
intended to be delivered to terrorist elements for facilitating unlawful and violent
activities, thereby attracting the provisions of Section 15 of the Unlawful
Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 along with other relevant sections of law.
4. On receipt of the FIR, the police registered Basistha P.S. Case No. 42/2026
under Sections 147 of the BNS, 2023, read with Sections 15/16/17/18 of the
Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. It is submitted that on 29.01.2026,
the accused applicants were produced before the Hon’ble District & Sessions
Judge, Kamrup (M) and after being shown arrested, they were remanded to

Page No.# 3/6
police custody for five (5) days. On 02.02.2026, after completion of police
custody, the accused applicants were remanded to judicial custody and since
then they are in judicial custody.
5. Mr. A. M. Bora, learned Senior Counsel for the Accused Applicant, submits
that the accused applicant is in no way involved in the allegations made in the
FIR. He submits that while the Accused Applicant was in the Beltola area of
Guwahati, he received a phone call from Anowar Hussain (Co-accused), a family
acquaintance, who informed him that he along with Imdadul Haque Sarkar , was
proceeding towards the USTM campus to visit the son of Imdadul Haque Sarkar
and requested the Accused Applicant to accompany them for the purpose of
guiding them to the campus, as the Accused Applicant was familiar with the
route. He submits that the Accused Applicant is an employee of USTM, where
he has been serving as Estate Manager since 2024. He further submits that the
Accused Applicant and the co-accused, namely Anowar Hussain and Malikuddin
Sheikh, are well-known family acquaintances and therefore, he accompanied
them out of respect and social obligation, solely for the purpose of guiding them
to the USTM campus. He submits that while they were proceeding towards
USTM, their vehicle was intercepted by the police, and the alleged cash and
cheques were recovered from the possession of the co-accused, Anowar
Hussain. He submits that the Accused Applicant had no knowledge about the
land sale deed transaction or the source of the money received by Anowar
Hussain. The Accused Applicant only became aware of the transaction and the
receipt of the money when it was recovered by the police from the vehicle.
6. The learned Senior Counsel submits that the Accused Applicant has neither
directly nor indirectly participated in any activity relating to terrorism nor does
he have any connection with any terrorist or Jihadi organization. He submits

Page No.# 4/6
that the Accused Applicant was arrested solely because he was travelling with
the aforesaid co-accused persons. Therefore, since no material is available
against the Accused Applicant, he should be granted bail at this stage. Learned
Senior Counsel further submits that the accused applicant has been in custody
for the past 23 days, only on suspicion, and without any material connecting
him to any offence under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.
7. Per contra, Mr. R. J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State, submits that the investigation is still at a nascent stage and that the
accused applicant has been accused of terrorist activities detrimental to the
security, sovereignty, and integrity of the nation. He submits that this is not a
case in which the accused applicant should be granted bail. He further submits
that the cash and cheques were recovered from the vehicle of the accused
along with the co-accused. He also submits that the Case Diary contains various
reports regarding the bank transactions and the recovered cheques are yet to
be verified by the concerned authority; therefore, the release of the accused
applicant at this stage would hamper the investigation. He submits that the
accused applicant has confessed that the money was intended for a Jihadi
organization and for terrorist activities and given the seriousness of the
allegations, bail should not be granted.
8. The Case Diary in the instant case has been produced, which has been
carefully perused by this Court, along with the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the respective parties.
9. From the materials placed before this Court, it is apparent that the land
belonging to the co-accused, Anowar Hussain, was in fact sold to Mustofa Salim
Ahmed and Mrs. Nazmin Amania Islam. The aforesaid agreement of sale,
already seized by the police, reveals that there was a monetary transaction and

Page No.# 5/6
Anowar Hussain received an amount of Rs. 17,00,000/- and cheques amounting
to Rs. 43,00,000/- of different denominations for the said land. It is seen that
the total consideration for the land was fixed at Rs. 60,00,000/-. This Court also
notes that Anowar Hussain had availed an overdraft loan facility from ICICI
Bank for a limit of Rs. 50,00,000/-, which was approved on 19.11.2024 for a
period of 12 months.
10. This Court, after perusal of the materials available in the Case Diary,
observes that while there is a confessional statement regarding the involvement
of the accused applicant in some Jihadi organization, no prima facie material
connects the Accused Applicant with any terrorist activity is available in the Case
Diary. Taking into account all the facts, although the Accused Applicant was in
police custody for five days and in judicial custody for the last eighteen days,
the police are yet to gather convincing material implicating the Accused
Applicant in any terrorist activity. At least, no prima facie material is available in
the Case Diary before this Court at this stage.
11. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Accused Applicant has
referred to the case of Thwaha Fasal vs. Union of India , reported in (2022)
14 SCC 766 , wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the Court is to
consider whether there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accusation
against the accused is prima facie true. If the Court is satisfied, after examining
the materials on record, that there are no reasonable grounds for believing that
the accusation against the accused is prima facie true, then the accused
applicant is entitled to bail.
12. After having considered the submissions and the facts of the case, this
Court is of the considered opinion that the Accused Applicant should be granted
bail at this stage, subject to certain conditions so that he can cooperate with the

Page No.# 6/6
investigation. Accordingly, it is directed that the Accused Applicant, namely
Dianur Islam , shall be released forthwith on bail on furnishing a bail bond of
Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) with two sureties of like nature, one of whom
shall be a Government servant, to the satisfaction of the learned District and
Sessions Judge, Kamrup (M), Assam, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The Accused Applicant shall cooperate with the investigation and make
himself available as and when called by the investigating officer;
(ii) The Accused Applicant shall report to the investigating officer in
connection with Basistha P.S. Case No. 42/2026 once in every month till
the FR/Charge sheet is filed by the IO, with the date of appearance to be
fixed by the investigating officer;
(iii) The Accused Applicant shall provide their contact details, including
photocopies of his Passport (if any), Aadhaar Card, Driving License, PAN
Card as well as mobile numbers and other contact information, to the
investigating officer;
(iv) The Accused Applicant shall not directly or indirectly attempt to
hamper or tamper with the investigation of the case.
13. In view of the aforesaid directions, this bail application stands disposed of,
as allowed.

JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
Order downloaded on 26-02-2026 12:12:23 AM