Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010160102025 2025:GAU-AS:11464 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1728/2025 MIRAJUL ALI ALIAS MIRAJUL ALAM SON OF TAHER ALI R/O WARD NO.10, CHIRA KUNDI, P.O. AND P.S. RANGIA DIST. KAMRUP, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D K SHARMA, KAMALINI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 27.08.2025 1. Heard Mr. D.K Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D.P Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. 2. By this application, the petitioner has prayed for pre-arrest Page No.# 2/3 bail in connection with Rangia P.S Case No. 138/2025 registered under Section 64/117(2) of B.N.S, 2023. 3. The F.I.R dated 21.06.2025 was lodged by the victim herself which reveals that on 20.06.2025, the petitioner by luring her took her to the house of one Rahek Ali and by taking her to a separate room, forcibly raped her and that she had raised a hue and cry, but the petitioner did not leave her. She further states that one old lady, on hearing her hue and cry, came to her rescue and on seeing the old lady, the petitioner fled the scene. 4. Mr. D.K Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and the victim were in a love relationship and they had decided to get married with each other and that the ingredients of Section 64 of B.N.S, 2023 is not attracted in the instant case. 5. Mr. D.P Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam however, by relying on the statement of the victim submitted that the victim and the petitioner were in relationship but as stated by the victim, when she wanted to go with the petitioner, the petitioner forcibly raped her. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for both sides and carefully gone through the Case Diary. Although in the F.I.R, the victim stated that the petitioner had lured her and took her to some other place and raped her against her will, however, in her statement before the Ld. Magistrate under Section 183 of the B.N.S, 2023 she stated that she and the petitioner were in a love relationship and that they thought of eloping to some Page No.# 3/3 other place and in the process, the victim stated that the petitioner raped her. 7. In view of the said inconsistencies, this Court finds it fit to release the petitioner on pre-arrest bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with 1(one) local surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority under the following conditions : (i) The petitioner shall not approach the victim or her family members at any point of time. (ii) The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation and appear before the I/O as and when called for. (iii) The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses connected with the case. 8. In view of the above, petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant