Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010075652025 2025:GAU-AS:4795 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/864/2025 HUSNE HABIB ALIAS MOON S/O- SORBESH ALI, VILL- JHAGRARPAR PART IV, P.O- JHAGRARPAR, P.S- DHUBRI, DIST- DHUBRI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY PP ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. B. HAZARIKA, MS. R CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER Date : 22.04.2025 1. Heard learned Senior Counsel Mr. H. R. A. Choudhury for the petitioner Husne Habib @Moon who has filed this application under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with prayer for pre-arrest bail as he is apprehending arrest in connection with Dhubri Police Station Case No. 74/2025 Page No.# 2/3 under Sections 140(3)/64(1)/89/296/115(2)/127(4)/351(2)/3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. Heard Mr. M. P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam. 3. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has raised objection stating that the petitioner is not entitled to pre-arrest bail considering the allegation against him. 4. The allegation against the petitioner is that he promised to marry the victim and took her to Hyderabad from Jhajrapara. It is submitted that the petitioner had committed sexual intercourse with the victim false promises of marriage and he impregnated her, but now the petitioner is avoiding the victim. The victim also underwent abortion. The other accused persons named in the FIR have also been threatening the victim with dire consequences. 5. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the victim is a married woman with two children aged 33 years, whereas, the petitioner is a young lad aged only 23 years. The petitioner has denied that he has induced the victim with false promises of marriage. It is not plausible that the petitioner could marry a woman who is already married. The victim cannot claim to be divorced as she has two children. 6. I have considered the submissions at the Bar with circumspection. 7. I have also scrutinized the Case Diary. It appears that pre-arrest bail may be granted to the petitioner. 8. The petitioner is willing to co-operate with the remaining part of investigation. Case Diary reveals that investigation has progressed substantially and custodial interrogation may not be required. 9. Considering all aspects, petition is allowed. In the event of his arrest, the Page No.# 3/3 petitioner shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- with a suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority under the condition that the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 10 days and co-operate with the investigation, failing which the bail order shall automatically stand cancelled. JUDGE Comparing Assistant