Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010195462024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2511/2024 IMRAN @ IMRAN DEWAN @ DHAN S/O KALACHAN DEWAN R/O DEHARKALAKUCHI P.S. MUKALMUA DIST. NALBARI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:MD. SAFIQUL ALI S/O MD. MAINUL ALI R/O DEHARKALAKUCHIA P.S. MUKALMUA DIST. NALBARI ASSAM PIN-78112 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S M ABDULLAH P, MD IMRAN,MD R ISLAM,MR. S RAHMAN,MS F HUSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS L RONGPIPI (R2),MS V.GURUNG (R2) Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MALASRI NANDI ORDER 28.01.2025 Heard Mr. S. Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and Ms. T. Wapangla, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2. By filing this application u/s 482 of BNSS, 2023, the petitioner, namely, Imran @ Imran Dewan @ Dhan, has sought for pre-arrest bail, who is apprehending arrest in connection with Mukalmua PS Case No.258/2024 under Section 64 of the BNS, 2023 R/W Section 4 of the Protection of the Children From Sexual Offence Act,2012. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is the next door neighbor of the informant. The petitioner and the daughter of the victim had love affair and in furtherance of their relationship the victim voluntarily went to the house of the petitioner to remain there and the petitioner has convinced the informant’s daughter to return back to her house, accordingly, she returned back to her parent’s house. Accordingly, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. In view of the above, the benefit of pre-arrest bail may be extended to the petitioner. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the Case Diary and submits that the victim has implicated the Page No.# 3/3 petitioner in the statement recorded u/s 183 of the BNSS. Learned counsel for the respondent no.2 also has objected in granting bail to the petitioner by stating that the victim has been sexually harassed by the petitioner. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the case diary, it reflects from the statement of the victim, that she has been sexually abused by the petitioner. The medical report of the victim also discloses that hymen of the victim has been partially torn. Moreover, as per the birth certificate collected by the I.O. during investigation, the victim is a minor girl. In view of the above, this Court finds it not a fit case to grant the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the pre-arrest bail application stands rejected. Return the case diary. This disposes of the anticipatory bail application. JUDGE Comparing Assistant