Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010083632025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/919/2025 SADDAM HUSSAIN S/O- NUR ISMAIL HUSSAIN, VILL- SILA, PS BARPETA, DIST- BARPETA, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R ALI, MR H A AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 15.05.2025 1. Heard Mr. R. Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. S. H. Borah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, filed by the petitioner, namely, Saddam Hussain, who is apprehending his arrest in Page No.# 2/4 connection with Barpeta P.S. Case No.100/2025, under Sections 64(2)/74/127(3) of BNS, 2023. 3. The gist of accusation is that on 19.03.2025, the victim girl had lodged an FIR before the Officer-In-Charge of Barpeta Police Station, wherein there are 7(seven) nos. of accused persons including the present petitioner, inter alia, alleging that the victim girl came to know about the petitioner through his Instagram account and eventually they came to know each other. It is alleged in the FIR that the petitioner had made a proposal to the victim girl which was rejected by her. It was further alleged in the FIR that on 29.10.2024, the petitioner forcefully took the victim girl to a Dhaba at Nagaon and committed rape on her. It is further alleged in the FIR that on 15.12.2024, the petitioner again took the victim girl on his motorcycle to a Dhaba and committed sexual intercourse with her and thereafter, the petitioner took the victim girl in the house of the accused no.2 named in the FIR with a promise to marry her. However, he left her there and the other accused persons thereafter physically assaulted the victim girl. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the allegation of rape made in the FIR are not true. He submits that the petitioner and the victim girl were in romantic relationship and any allegation of physical relationship, even if it is assumed to be true would be consensual. Hence, he submits that considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the allegations levelled by the petitioner would not attract any offence under Section 64 of BNS. Rather it would be an offence under Section 69, even if accusation of physical relationship to the victim girl is assumed to be true. He has also Page No.# 3/4 submitted that the petitioner has not yet started earning, and his family members are against the marriage at this stage. 5. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the Case Diary of Barpeta P.S. Case No.100/2025 and has submitted that the victim girl in her statement recorded under Section 183 of BNSS has implicated the petitioner. She fairly submits that the victim girl has admitted that initially there was love affair between the victim girl and the petitioner. 1. I have considered the submissions, made by the learned counsel of both the sides and has perused the Case Diary which was produced before this Court. 2. Though there is no indication of any love affair between the victim girl and the petitioner in the FIR, however, the statement of the victim girl recorded under Section 183 of BNSS shows that there was love affair between the victim and the petitioner. It appears that the ingredients of Section 69 of BNS in the case and not Section 64 as projected by the victim girl. 3. Be that as it may, considering the nature of this case, this Court is of the considered opinion that if the petitioner co-operates in the investigation, his custodial detention may not be necessary for fair completion of the investigation of this case. 4. Hence, this Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner, Saddam Hussain, to appear before the Investigating Officer of Barpeta P.S. Case No.100/2025 within a period of 10(ten) days from the date of this order and co-operate in the Page No.# 4/4 investigation. If he does so within the stipulated period of time, in the event of his arrest in the aforesaid case, he shall be allowed to go on bail of Rs.30,000/-(Rupees Thirty Thousand) only with one surety of like amount subject to the satisfaction of the arresting authority. i) That the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any persons who may be acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts of the case before the Investigating Officer; ii) That the petitioner shall co-operate in the investigation; 5. Send back the Case Diary. 6. With above observations, this anticipatory bail application is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant