Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010124612025 2025:GAU-AS:9166 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1363/2025 MD. ASHIQUL ISLAM S/O- NURUL ISLAM. R/O- VILL.- SAHARIA GAON, P.S.- MOIRABARI, PIN-782126. DIST.- MORIGAON, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR J C BORAH, Advocate for the Respondent : , Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 16.07.2025 Heard Mr. J. C. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. S. Lahkar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. This is an application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of pre-arrest bail to the accused/petitioner, who is apprehending arrest in connection with Moirabari P.S. Case No. 201/2019, under Sections 120(B)/376(2)(N)/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Scanned copy of the Trial Court Record has already been received and I have perused the same. It is submitted by Mr. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner, that the present accused/petitioner is innocent and he is no way connected in the alleged offence. From the contents of the F.I.R. itself, it is seen that it was lodged by the victim only after her marriage and subsequent birth of a child and no earlier F.I.R. had been lodged against the petitioner. The present F.I.R. have been lodged only after the victim was allegedly driven out from her matrimonial home. Further he submitted that the accused/ petitioner is a daily wage labourer and had to leave his place of residence for the purpose of earning his livelihood. He also submitted that although the petitioner had earlier engaged a counsel upon receiving summons, due to communication gap, he was unaware Page No.# 3/4 of the issuance of NBWA against him. He further submitted that the Investigating Authority had no authority to declare him as an absconder in the charge-sheet. However, he submitted that the Court had earlier issued summons to the present petitioner, he is now ready and willing to appear before the learned Trial Court and face the trial, if he is provided with some interim protection. Mr. Lahkar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, submitted in this regard that there are sufficient incriminating materials against the present accused/petitioner and from the case record, it reveals that the accused/petitioner was evading police arrest and in spite of issuance of NBWA on several occasions, he could not be arrested in connection with this case and thereafter considering the report of the Executing Officer, P&A was also issued against the present accused/petitioner. He accordingly submitted that considering the conduct of the present accused/petitioner, the prayer for his anticipatory bail may not be considered at this stage. However, he may be directed to appear before the learned Trial Court below with an appropriate application for bail which may be considered in accordance with law. After hearing the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and also on perusal of the Trial Court Record as well as the orders passed by the learned Trial Court, it is seen that initially the summons were issued to the present accused/ petitioner upon receipt of the charge-sheet. However, in spite of service of summons, the petitioner did not appear before the learned Trial Court and hence, the NBWA was issued against him. It further appears that the learned Trial Court took all endeavours to procure the attendance of the present Page No.# 4/4 petitioner, but the NBWA could not be executed and the petitioner remained untraceable. Considering these circumstances, the learned Trial Court issued reminders and show cause notices to the Officer-In-Charge of the concerned Police Station and subsequently finding no other alternative, the learned Trial Court proceeded to issued P&A against the petitioner. Thus, it is seen that since the year 2022, the accused/petitioner has been evading police arrest and has not appeared before the learned Trial Court. In view of above aspect of the case as well as the conduct of the present accused/petitioner, I do not find it a fit case to grant any sort of interim protection to the present accused/ petitioner. However, the petitioner may approach the learned Trial Court below with an appropriate application for bail, which may be considered in accordance with law. In terms of above, this anticipatory bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant