Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010253092024 2025:GAU-AS:5531 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/3119/2024 SYED ZAKIR ULLAH S/O LATE MD. CHAND ULLAH, RESIDENT OF DHUBRI TOWN, WARD NO. 10, PS AND DIST DHUBRI, ASSAM 783301 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H R A CHOUDHURY, MRS S RAHANA,B DAS,MR. A M AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 05-05-2025 Heard Mr. HRA Choudhury, the learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. I.A Choudhury, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R.J. Baruah, Page No.# 2/3 the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of State respondent. 2. This is an application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 for granting pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, namely, Syed Zakir Ullah in connection with Bongaigaon P.S. Case No. 381/2024 under Sections 61(2)(a)/64(2)(m)/127(2) of BNS, 2023, R/W Section 66(E)/67(A) of Information Technology Act, 2000. 3. Case Diary received. Perused the same. 4. It is submitted by Mr. Choudhury, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner that a false and concocted allegation has been brought against the present petitioner only on the grudge as he warned her husband. However, after obtaining the order of interim pre-arrest bail, the accused/petitioner appeared before the I/O, cooperated in the investigation and his statement is also recorded u/s 183 BNSS. He is still ready and willing to cooperate with the I/O in further investigation of the case, if interim bail is hereby made absolute. 5. Mr. Baruah, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted in this regard that the accused/petitioner appeared before the I/O and cooperated in the investigation. But, the victim/informant brought sufficient incriminating materials against the present accused/petitioner claiming that he had forceful sexual intercourse with her. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and other aspects of the case, I find that custodial interrogation may not be necessary in the present case and accordingly I find it a fit case to extend the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the present petitioner. Hence, the order of interim bail dated 29.11.2024 is Page No.# 3/3 hereby made absolute under the same terms and conditions. JUDGE Comparing Assistant