Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 24052 (GAU)

SRI MANAB DAS v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

Bail Appln./3666/2025 · 2025-11-13

Sanjeev Kumar Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010249942025 2025:GAU-AS:15424 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3666/2025 SRI MANAB DAS SON OF SRI KRISHNA DAS, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE HIRAPARA UNDER AZARA POLICE STATION IN THE DISTRICT OF KAMRUP(M), ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE P.P., ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R B PHOOKAN, MR K J HAZARIKA,MS P SAIKIA,MR P CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER 14.11.2025 Heard Mr. R B Phookan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D P Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor. This is an application under Sectopm 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for granting bail to the accused/petitioner, namely; Sri Manab Das, in connection with Azara Page No.# 2/3 Police Station Case No. 161/2025 registered under Section 69 of the BNS, 2023. The allegation against the present petitioner is that he entered into a relationship with the informant by giving her a false promise of marriage and to give her a job and that induced her to elope with him. Thereafter, they have been living in a rented house in Guwahati. It is also alleged that the petitioner entered into a physical relationship with the complainant in course of their relationship. The date of occurrence as stated in the FIR is 07.03.2025 and the FIR has been lodged on 25.10.2025, i.e., about seven months later. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the informant who is a 38 years old lady voluntarily fled away with the petitioner in view of their relationship. The attention of the Court has been drawn to the photographs of the informant and the petitioner annexed to the bail application from which the relationship appears to be consensual. In the meantime, the petitioner has spent 19 days behind bars and further custodial detention of the petitioner is not necessary, in view of the nature of the allegations and what has been indicated above. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is allowed. It is provided that the accused petitioner, named above, shall be released on bail of Rs. 20,000/- only, with one surety of the like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the learned Elaka Magistrate, subject to the following condition: (1) That the accused petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, Page No.# 3/3 make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing those facts to the Court or to any police officer. 7. The bail application stands disposed of accordingly. JUDGE Comparing Assistant