Page No.# 1/3 GAHC040014932025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : AB/119/2025 Smti Tadar Yamak @ Amak Wife of Shri Tadar Kasung, presntly residing G Sector, Naharlagun, PO and PS Naharlagun, Papum Pare District, Arunachal Pradesh. VERSUS The State of AP represented by the PP of AP Advocate for the Petitioner : Lipi Niri, Priya Lomdak,A Bodo Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP, BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS O R D E R 06.11.2025 Heard Mr. A. Bodo, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. T. Jini, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State respondent. 2. The applicant has filed this application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, read with Article 21 of the Constitution of Page No.# 2/3 India, seeking grant of anticipatory bail, apprehending her arrest in connection with Naharlagun P.S. Case No. 24/24, under Sections 343/326/317 of IPC read with Section 14 of Child Labour (Prohibition & Regulation) Act, 1986, 75 & 79 of JJB Act, 2015. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the incident occurred on 05.03.2024, and the case is still under investigation. 4. The case arose out of a FIR dated 12.04.2024, which was preferred after a complaint to the welfare committee child. The gist of the allegations brought is that the informant and two minor family members were working in the house of one Tadar Yamak and subsequently, one of his family member has assaulted causing injuries. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no allegation of assault against the present petitioner and that in the meantime, the parties have also arrived at a settlement. He has drawn my attention to the copy of settlement deed dated 16.03.2025 annexed with the petition. However, none appears on behalf of the informant. 6. The case diary is received, which indicates that the investigation is almost complete and pending for recording of the statement of the present petitioner as well as other person and that if the accused person co-operates with the investigation, the I/O has fairly submitted that there is no objection. 7. The learned Additional P.P. for the State, drawing my attention to the medical report - submits that the injury is simple injury caused by the blunt object. 8. In the given facts and circumstances, I am of the considered view that the granting of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner at this stage would not prejudice the Page No.# 3/3 investigation and accordingly, it is directed that in the event of her arrest, the petitioner named above, shall be released on bail, in connection with the above case, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority, subject, of course, to the following conditions:- (i) She shall co-operate with the remaining investigation and appear before the I/O making herself available for examination. (ii) She shall not hamper or tamper with the evidence. (iii) She shall not intimidate harass or harm the informant/victim and their family members. 9. Violation of bail conditions will entail cancellation of the bail. 10. This anticipatory bail application stands allowed and disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant