Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010243382024 2025:GAU-AS:596 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/3073/2024 FARIDUL ISLAM S/O. SAMSUL HOQUE, R/O. VILLAGE KOIMARI, P.S. LAKHIPUR, DISTRICT GOALPARA, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H ROHMAN, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 21.01.2025 Heard Mr. S. C. Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. Page No.# 2/4 This is an application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023, praying for grant of pre-arrest bail to the accused/petitioner, who is apprehending arrest in connection with Lakhipur P.S. Case No. 198/2024, under Section 61(2)/126/118(2)/109 of BNS, 2023. Case Diary has been received. Perused the same. Heard both sides. It is submitted by Mr. Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioner, that the present accused/petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. More so, he submitted that the statement made in the F.I.R. itself is not believable as an innocent person cannot be beaten up by the accused person without any reason and nothing has been explained in the F.I.R. as to why he was assaulted by the accused person while he was returning from the medicine store. Further he submitted that the actual fact is that the husband of the informant was found under the bed of the accused/petitioner’s wife and in 2 (two) occasions, he was hiding under the bed and assaulted the wife of the present petitioner and for which, she also sustained injury. But suppressing those facts, the present F.I.R. has been lodged by the informant. He further submitted that while the husband of the informant was found under the bed of wife of the present petitioner, she raised hue and cry and public came and assaulted him and for which, he sustained some injuries. Mr. Biswas further submitted that the present petitioner is however ready and willing to appear before the I.O. and to co-operate in the investigation of the case if he is granted with the privilege of pre-arrest bail. More so, as there is sufficient progress in the investigation, custodial interrogation of the present petitioner may not be Page No.# 3/4 required at this stage. Mr. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, submitted in this regard that there are sufficient materials collected by the I.O. against the present petitioner and he is the main culprit who assaulted the victim and for which, he sustained grievous injuries on his person and also sustained fracture injury on leg. Accordingly, he submitted that considering the materials available in the Case Diary as well as in the Medical Report, the custodial interrogation of the present petitioner may be necessary for the purpose of investigation and hence he raised objection and submitted that it is not at all a fit case to extend the benefit of pre-arrest bail to the present petitioner. After hearing the submissions made by the learned counsels for both sides, I have also perused the materials available in the Case Diary and the Medical Report. It is a fact that there was a clash between 2 (two) groups and the victim also sustained injuries due to assault allegedly made by the present petitioner. However, considering the entire aspects of the case, I find that custodial interrogation of the present accused/petitioner may not be required for the interest of investigation and therefore, I find it a fit case to extend the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the accused/petitioner. Accordingly, it is provided that in the event of arrest of the accused/petitioner, namely, Faridul Islam, in connection with Lakhipur P.S. Case No. 198/2024, under Section 61(2)/126/118 (2)/109 of BNS, 2023, he shall be enlarged on pre-arrest bail on his executing a bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) only with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the Page No.# 4/4 arresting authority, subject to the following conditions: (i) that the petitioner shall fully co-operate with the investigation of the case and shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required in connection with the investigation of the aforesaid P.S. Case; and (ii) that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. The anticipatory bail application stands disposed of in terms above. The Case Diary be sent back. JUDGE Comparing Assistant