Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010152442025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2281/2025 ARUP NARAH S/O MURULI NARAH R/O KALIABINIRAB ARI P.S. GARAMUR DIST. MAJULI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:MONUMAI PEGU W/O GIYANJYOTI PEGU R/O POKUNIA P.S. PANIGAON DIST. LAKHIMPUR ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MRS. B GOGOI, A N HUSSAIN,MS M BORAH Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA O R D E R Date : 07.08.2025. Heard Mrs. B. Gogoi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam appearing for the State respondent. Page No.# 2/3 This is an application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of bail to the accused petitioner, who has been arrested on 14.06.2025, in connection with Garamur P.S. Case No. 29/2015 (corresponding to G.R. Case No.57/2025), under Section 69/89 of the BNS, 2023. Scanned copy of the TCR has already been received and perused the same. It is submitted by Mrs. B. Gogoi, learned counsel for the petitioner that the present petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any such offence as alleged in the FIR. It is a fact that there was love relationship between the victim and the accused/petitioner and even if anything had happened, it was consensual as both the victim and the accused are major and they were also supposed to get married. Further, she submitted that as per the allegation made in the FIR, the incident had happened on 23.02.2025 but surprisingly, the FIR was lodged on 21.05.2025, i.e. after about three months of the incident, without any explanation in the FIR with regard to delay in lodging the same. Subsequently the present petitioner got arrested in connection with this case on 14.06.2025. Charge sheet has already been laid and the case has already been committed before the learned Sessions Judge. However, the prayer for the bail has been rejected by the learned Sessions Judge, vide its order dated 10.07.2025. The petitioner is ready and willing to appear before the learned Trial Court below on each and every date, to be fixed by the Court and to contest the case, if he is provided with the privilege of bail. Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam submitted in this Page No.# 3/3 regard that there are sufficient incriminating materials against the present petitioner and on the basis of which the charge sheet has already been filed against him. He particularly submitted that in the statement made by the victim, recorded under Section 183 CrPC, implicates the petitioner and the intention of the petitioner to deceive the victim is also found in the statement made by her. Mr. Sarma further submitted that there is probability of hampering or tampering with the evidence of the victim and other witnesses, if the petitioner is released on bail at this stage. Hearing the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides and considering the materials available in the record and the case diary, it is seen that the allegation brought against the petitioner that with a false promise of marriage, he had physical relationship with the victim and the victim had also brought incriminating materials against the present accused petitioner in her statement, recorded under Section 183 CrPC. The probability of tampering with the evidence, specially the victim cannot be denied at this stage. In view of this, I find that it is not a fit case to allow the petitioner to go on bail at this stage before recording the statement of the material witnesses, specially the victim of this Court. Accordingly, the present petition stands dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant