Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010176042026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1942/2026 SMT PABITA DAS W/O-LATE JAYANTA DAS, VILL.-ATHKUPARA, P.S.-BOKO, DIST.-KAMRUP (RURAL) PIN -781123. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A MANNAF, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 14.09.2026 Heard Mr. A. Mannaf, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. By this application, the petitioner has sought for pre-arrest bail in connection with Boko P.S. Case No. 67/2026 registered under Sections 61(2) (b)/217/240/264/318(4)/336(3) of BNS, 2023. The allegation against the Page No.# 2/3 petitioner is that the insurance company i.e. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited had given an information before the Superintendent of Police, Kamrup(Rural), Assam stating inter alia that in the MACT Case No. 141/2018 certain false information were given to the effect that the death of the husband of the petitioner was stated to be on 30.12.2017, whereas in the death certificate, death was shown to be on 29.12.2017. Discrepancy was also found in the post mortem report regarding the injuries found in the deceased and the allegations made in the FIR that the deceased was hit from the back. As such, an inquiry was conducted and the same was forwarded to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Kamrup(Rural), Assam. The said forwarding report was considered to be the FIR in the instant case and the case was registered as Boko P.S. Case No. 67/2026. 3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that immediately on death of her husband, she lodged an FIR before the Boko Police Station and the same was registered as Boko P.S. Case No. 02/2018. He submits that there is no infirmity or incorrectness in the information regarding the alleged incident. 4. Mr. B. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State on the other hand had submitted that some discrepancy is seen with regard to the time of occurrence as well as the filing of the charge sheet in connection with Boko P.S. Case No. 67/2026. 5. Be that as it may, it is further noticed that the petitioner was enlarged on interim pre arrest bail vide order dated 20.08.2026 on the condition that petitioner should appear before the Investigating Officer within a period of 10 days . 6. Mr. B. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State on Page No.# 3/3 perusal of the Case Diary submits that the petitioner had appeared before the Investigating Officer and her statement was recorded. As such, it is seen that the petitioner has cooperated with the investigation. 7. In view of the same, this Court deems it fit to make the order dated 20.08.2026 absolute with the further condition that the petitioner should comply with the directions and conditions already narrated in the order dated 20.08.2026. 8. Petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant