Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010255882024 2025:GAU-AS:851 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/3168/2024 RUMAN BEGUM BARBHUIYA W/O ABJAL HUSSAIN BARBHUIYA R/O VILL- NEAIRGRAM PT.II, P.S. SILCHAR, DIST. CACHAR, ASSAM PIN- 788103 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR F Z MAZUMDER, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 27.01.2025 Heard Mr. F. Z. Mazumder, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. Page No.# 2/3 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 Silchar P.S. Case No. 981/2024, under Section 123 of BNS, 2023 Case Diary has been received. Perused the same. Heard both sides. It is submitted by Mr. Mazumder, learned counsel for the petitioner, that the present accused/petitioner is innocent and she is no way connected in the alleged offence. However, it is a fact that taking the advantage of absence of the husband of the present petitioner, the deceased used to come to her house and wanted to have some relationship with her. On the day of incident also, the deceased came with such kind of proposal and for which, there was an argument and the mother-in-law of the petitioner also scolded him and thereafter, he went back to his house and committed suicide by poisoning himself. But the present petitioner had not committed any such offence as alleged in the F.I.R. However, she is ready and willing to co-operate the I.O. in further investigation of this case if she is granted with the privilege of pre-arrest bail. Mr. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, submitted in this regard that there are sufficient incriminating materials so far collected by the I.O. and the FSL Report of the viscera also speaks about the presence of Organophosphorus. He further submitted that not only the statement of the informant, but the evidence of the other witnesses also supported the case of the prosecution and as per them also, the present petitioner had given some poisonous substance to the deceased and thereafter his health condition got Page No.# 3/3 deteriorated and subsequently died in the hospital. Accordingly, he raised objection and submitted that it is not a fit case to grant the privilege of pre- arrest bail to the present accused/petitioner. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels for both sides, materials available in the Case Diary and the nature of offence, I do not find it appropriate to extend the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the present accused/petitioner at this stage and accordingly the present anticipatory bail application stands rejected. In terms of above, this anticipatory bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant