Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Gauhati High Court

Page No.# 1/2 vs The State Of Assam on 8 January, 2026

                                                                       Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010283882025




                                                                 2026:GAU-AS:365

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

                                  Case No. : AB/2998/2025

            ABHISHEK THAKURI @ ABHISHEKH THAKURI
            S/O MUNNA THAKURI
            RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO. 21, GUNAMAYEE ROAD, TARAPUR, P.O.
            TARAPUR
            P.S. SILCHAR, DIST. CACHAR, ASSAM

            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM
            REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM



Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR M HOQUE, MS J BEGUM

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,




                                    BEFORE
                        HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS

                                           ORDER

Date : 08.01.2026 Heard Mr. M. Hoque, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Baishya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, whereby the petitioner, namely, Abhishek Page No.# 2/2 Thakuri @ Abhishekh Thakuri, has prayed for granting pre-arrest bail, apprehending arrest in connection with Crime Branch P.S. Case No. 12/2025 under Sections 316/318/61 of BNS, 2023.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner received notice under Section 35(3) and that he is willing to appear before the I.O. but he is apprehending arrest.

4. The case diary has been received with bail objection.

5. I have perused the relevant portions including the contentions made in the bail objection. It is stated thereupon investigation, it was found that the present petitioner was actively involved in trying to bribe players to intentionally play in a different manner to further the objective of match fixing.

6. I have perused the statements of the witnesses who were supposedly approached and sought to be bribed by the petitioner to manipulate cricket games, but the players refused the said offers and reported the matter.

7. Considering the materials revealed and the fact that the investigation is still going on, it may not be prudent to put any fetters on the ongoing investigation. Therefore, the instant bail petition stands rejected at this stage.

8. Send back the case diary.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant