Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010234552025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2528/2025 JAMAL UDDIN @ JAMAL S/O- BINESH ALI. R/O- HOLLOWKANDA, P.S.- BHURAGAON, DIST.- MORIGAON, ASSAM. 2: SULMAN ALI S/O- BINESH ALI. R/O- HOLLOWKANDA P.S.- BHURAGAON DIST.- MORIGAON ASSAM. 3: MUKTAR HUSSAIN S/O- BINESH ALI. R/O- HOLLOWKANDA P.S.- BHURAGAON DIST.- MORIGAON ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S M ABDULLAH P, MD IMRAN,MD R ISLAM,MS F HUSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. KHAIRUL ISLAM (FOR INFORMANT) Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER Date : 10.11.2025 1. Heard Mr. S.M Abdullah P, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. K.K Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam and Mr. Khairul Islam, learned counsel appearing for the informant. 2. This is an application filed U/S 482 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners namely, (1) Jamal Uddin @ Jamal, (2) Sulman Ali and (3) Muktar Hussain in connection with Laharighat P.S Case No. 186/2025 filed U/S 331(4)/64(1)/115(2)/329(3)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023. 3. The allegations against the petitioners is that on 02.09.2025 the informant namely Laili Khatun has lodged an ejhar before the Officer-In-Charge of Laharighat Police Station alleging, inter alia, that on last 01.09.2025 her husband went to her mother's house at Darrang and on 02.09.2025 around 11.30 P.M. at night the petitioner No.1 by taking advantage of her husband's absence and by breaking the wall of their thatched house entered her room and when she was sleeping on her bed he sat on her and by showing a deggar which he has brought has torn her clothes and forcefully made physical relation with her against her will and also threatened that her will kill her if she raised hue and cry. When the above named petitioner No.1 was doing physical relation with her then she attacked him with his deggar in his genitals and immediately the petitioner No.1 assaulted her and fled away from her house and left his mobile phone and sandals in her house. After that the petitioner No.2 & 3 entered her house illegally and asked the mobile phone and sandals which the Page No.# 3/4 petitioner No.1 left in her house and when she denied to give the same then they rebuked her with slang languages and also assaulted her. 4. Mr. S.M Abdullah P, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are totally false. It is further submitted that the petitioners belong to the same locality and there was a relationship going on between the accused No. 1 and the informant who is a mother of three children and on the night of the alleged incident, the three children were sleeping on the same bed with the informant and therefore, the allegations made in the FIR are not believable. 5. Case Diary, as called for, has been received. 6. Although the informant has stood by her allegations made in the FIR and in her statements made before the police and the Ld. Magistrate, the C.D.R analysis reflected in the C.D shows that the petitioner No. 1 and the informant have been in constant contact and even on the day of the incident, there were 3(three) telephonic interactions between them and just prior to the occurrence, there was a telephonic conversation between them. 7. From the above, there appears to be sufficient force in the contentions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 8. Mr. Khairul Islam, learned counsel appearing for the informant had submitted that there was no such relationship between the petitioner No. 1 and the informant and that the informant had taken shelter in some other place as the accused persons are going around threatening them. That aspect of the matter can be taken care of by imposing suitable conditions. 9. Keeping in view the material disclosed by the Case Diary as Page No.# 4/4 indicated above, the prayer for pre-arrest bail is allowed. 11. The petitioners namely, (1) Jamal Uddin @ Jamal, (2) Sulman Ali and (3) Muktar Hussain shall be released on interim pre-arrest bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- each with 1(one) surety each to the satisfaction of the arresting authority in connection with the aforesaid case under the following conditions : i. The petitioners shall not try to contact or intimidate the informant in any manner either directly or indirectly, by themselves or through any other person. ii. The petitioner shall appear before the I/O within a period of 7(seven) days from the date of this order for their interrogation. 12. Any violation of the aforesaid conditions would be sufficient ground for cancellation of the bail. 13. Bail petition stands disposed of accordingly. JUDGE Comparing Assistant