Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010258182024 2025:GAU-AS:597 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/3192/2024 ABDUL MALEK AND 3 ORS. S/O LT. RAHAM ALI VILL- TARANGAPUR P.O. TULSIBARI P.S. LAKHIPUR DIST. GOALPARA, ASSAM 2: ALI HOSEN @ ALI HUSSAIN S/O ABU SHAMA VILL- TARANGAPUR P.O. TULSIBARI P.S. LAKHIPUR DIST. GOALPARA ASSAM 3: LAL MIYAN S/O MOYDAN ALI VILL- TARANGAPUR P.O. TULSIBARI DIST. GOALPARA ASSAM 4: MALEK MIAH @ ABDUL MALEK S/O SAYED ALI VILL- TARANGAPUR P.O. TULSIBARI P.S. LAKHIPUR DIST. GOALPARA ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Page No.# 2/5 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H R A CHOUDHURY, MR. N ISLAM,R KHA,MS. P AHMED,MR. M I HUSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR Z RAHMAN(INFORMANT),MR. J AHMED (INFORMANT) BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 21.01.2025 Heard Mr. HRA Choudhury, the learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. M.I. Hussain, the learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. R.J. Baruah, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of State respondent and Mr. J. Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for the informant. 2. This is an application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 for granting pre-arrest bail to the petitioners in connection with Lakhipur P.S. Case No. 243/2024 under Sections 61(2)/103(1)/3(5) of BNS. 3. Case Diary received. Perused the same. Heard both sides. 4. It is submitted by Mr. Choudhury, the learned senior counsel that the present accused no. 1 one Raju Ali had love affairs with the victim and as there was dispute between both the family members and that she did not attained the age of majority, the family members of the accused no. 1 i.e. the present petitioners refused marrying minor girl. On the day of the incident the father of Page No.# 3/5 the deceased called the accused no. 1 in their own house and he was assaulted by the father of the victim in presence of her and when she came to rescue him, she was also assaulted by the informant and locked her in a room and thereafter out of fear and depression she committed suicide. It is submitted that the accused no. 1 has already been arrested in connection with this case and the present petitioners who are the parents, family members and neighbours are not at all involved in the alleged offence. However, all the petitioners are ready and willing to co-operate with the Investigating Officer for further investigation of the case, if they are granted the privilege of pre-arrest bail. 5. Mr. Baruah, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted in this regard that from the materials available in the Case Diary, it is seen that the victim had love affairs with the accused no. 1 who is already arrested in connection with this case and so far the materials that have been collected by the IO it is seen that the accused no. 1 is involved in the alleged offence. However, till date the post-mortem report could not be collected as the report from the FSL is not yet collected by the Investigating Officer and is still awaited. Further, it is submitted that the informant who is the father of the victim implicated all the accused-persons and stated that all the petitioners are also involved in the alleged offence. Accordingly, Mr. Baruah raised objection and submitted that it is not a fit case to extend the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner at this stage. 6. Mr. Ahmed, the learned counsel appearing for the informant submitted in this regard that in spite of the filing of the FIR, the Investigating Officer did not take any action and for which they had to approach the SP of the concerned district and thereafter only the case was registered and the accused no. 1 was Page No.# 4/5 arrested accordingly. However, till date the mother of the victim and other witnesses are not yet examined by the Investigating Officer who may be the vital witnesses for the prosecution. Further he submitted that as per instructions all the petitioners are involved in the commission of murder of the victim. Mr. Ahmed further submitted that the photographs which were collected also shows that one person cannot hang herself or himself in a position which is shown in the photographs. From the photographs also it can be held that it is a pre- planned murder which is given a colour of suicide. Mr. Ahmed accordingly raised objection and submitted that it is not at all a fit case to grant the privilege of pr- arrest bail to the accused-petitioner. 7. Hearing the submission made by learned counsel for both sides, I have also perused the materials available in the Case Diary, it is seen that it is the informant who implicated all the accused-petitioners of the family members of the accused no. 1 in the commission of murder of the minor daughter of the informant. However, there is no eye-witness to the prosecution case and the other witnesses only heard about the incident but considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the informant it is seen that the Investigating Officer has not recorded the statement of the mother of the victim who may be one of the vital witness for the prosecution. 8. Considering all this aspects of the case, the death of a minor girl who is only 14 years, I find it is not a fit case to extent the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the accused-petitioners, hence stands rejected at this stage. 9. However, the accused-petitioners may approach the appropriate forum if he/she is not satisfied by the investigation so far conducted by the Investigating Officer. Page No.# 5/5 10. With the above observation, the AB stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant