Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010165012025 2025:GAU-AS:11933 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1808/2025 JALBAHAR SK AND ANR. SON OF LT.ISA SHEIKH R/O VILL- MANDARPARA P.S. SUKCHAR DIST. SOUTH SALMARA- MANKACHAR, ASSAM, PIN-783128. 2: GOL HUSSAIN S/O LT. ISA SHEIKH R/O VILL- MANDARPARA P.S. SUKCHAR DIST. SOUTH SALMARA- MANKACHAR ASSAM PIN-783128 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A Z AHMED, MR. A KHALEK Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 03.09.2025 Heard Mr. H.R.A. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. A.Z. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. By this application, the petitioners have prayed for pre-arrest bail in connection with Sukchar Police Station Case No. 43/2025 registered under Section 126(2)/74/76/117(2)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023. 3. The FIR dated 04.07.2025 reveals that on 21.06.2025 while the victim was coming back towards her house, the petitioner No. 1 caught her hand from backside and gave her bad signal and when she did not agree with the intention of accused No. 1, the accused No. 1 assaulted her and caused grievous injuries and that when she shouted, the accused No. 2, i.e., the petitioner No. 2 came and assaulted her and outraged her modesty. 4. Mr. H.R.A. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submits that the story projected by the informant is a concocted one and that the actual story is that the husband of the informant had taken an amount of Rs. 5,000/- as loan from the petitioner No. 1, which was not repaid and that the present story is built up by the informant at the instance of the husband of the informant. 5. Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State respondent Page No.# 3/4 however on perusal of the Case Diary submits that the victim had, in her statement before the Police Officer had stated that the petitioner No. 1 had assaulted her and outraged her modesty. He further submits that there are other witnesses who had also stated that the victim was attacked by the petitioners. 6. On considering the above submissions made by the learned counsels at the bar and moreso, in view of the fact that in the FIR, which was lodged by the victim, she stated that the petitioner No. 1 caught her and gave bad signal and petitioner No. 2 outraged her modesty but in her 161 statement, she implicated only the petitioner No. 1. 7. In view of the inconsistency, this Court deems it fit that the petitioner No. 1 may be released on pre-arrest bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with 1 local surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority under the following conditions:- 1. The petitioner will appear before the Investigating Officer within 7 (seven) days from today and will make himself available for interrogation as and when called for. 2. The petitioner will not temper with the evidence or influence any other witnesses. 3. The petitioner will not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned jurisdictional Magistrate without prior permission. 8. Further, as far as the petitioner No. 2 is concerned, it is seen that he was already enlarged on interim pre-arrest bail vide Order dated 31.07.2025 and in view of the same, the said interim bail may be made absolute with the further direction that the petitioner will comply with the conditions mentioned therein Page No.# 4/4 without fail. 9. Accordingly, the Anticipatory Bail Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant