Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010150392025 2025:GAU-AS:11026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1615/2025 BISWAJIT DAS SON OF LATE LABEY DAS R/O SILIGURI BASTI, P.S. HOJAI P.O. HOJAI DIST. HOJAI, PIN-782435 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : G UDDIN, P ADHIKARI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 19-08-2025 Heard Ms. P. Adhikari, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sharma, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of State respondent. Page No.# 2/3 2. This is an application u/s 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 for granting pre-arrest bail to the accused petitioner in connection with Hojai P.S. Case No. 181/2025 u/s 64 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. 3. It is submitted by Ms. Adhikari, the learned counsel for the petitioner that present petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any such offence as alleged in the FIR. The petitioner and the victim are cousin brother and sister and after the death of his parents they used to reside in the same campus and only to deprive him from the property the informant hatched the conspiracy and result instant FIR by stating some fake allegations. However, he is ready and willing to extend his cooperation in the further investigation of this case, if he is granted with the privilege of interim pre-arrest bail. 4. Mr. Sharma, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted in this regard that there are sufficient incriminating materials in the Case Diary, specially the statement of the victim recorded u/s 183 BNSS and the other vital witnesses also supported the prosecution case. Mr. Sharma accordingly raised objection and submitted that it is not at all a fit case to grant bail to the present petitioner. 5. Hearing the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides, I have perused the Case Diary and the statement made by the witnesses, especially the victim u/s 183 BNSS. It is a fact that the petitioner and the victim are cousin brother and sister. But, in spite of knowing their relationship, the petitioner has committed such a heinous crime on the informant’s daughter and considering this aspect of the case, I do not find it a fit case to extend the privilege of pre- Page No.# 3/3 arrest bail to the present petitioner and accordingly the same stands rejected. In view of above, this Anticipatory Bail application stands disposed of. Case Diary be returned. JUDGE Comparing Assistant