Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010246012025 2025:GAU-AS:15149 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2657/2025 ABDULLAH HUSSAIN AND ANR S/O ABDUL JABBAR. R/O VILL- GHORARDHAP, P.O. KALIGAN BAZAR, P.S. SRIBHUMI, DIST. SRIBHUMI. 2: AFJAL HUSSAIN S/O ABDUL JABBAR R/O VILL- GHORARDHAP P.O. KALIGAN BAZAR P.S. SRIBHUMI DIST. SRIBHUMI VERSUS THE STATE OF NAGALAND REP BY THE PP, NAGALAND Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R DUBEY, MS N B KAYASTHA,MR. A N I HUSSAIN,MS. A B KAYASTHA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, NAGALAND, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER 10.11.2025 1. Heard Mr. R. Dubey, learned counsel for the accused/applicants. Also heard Ms. A. Aier, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State Page No.# 2/4 of Nagaland. 2. This petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the accused/applicants, namely, Abdullah Hussain and Afjal Hussain, have prayed for granting pre-arrest bail, apprehending arrest in connection with Women Police Station Dimapur P.S. Case No. 21/2025, registered under Section 77/78 and 79 of BNS, 2023. 3. The FIR dated 26.09.2025 reveals the allegation that the accused No.2 used to look upon the informant with creepy gaze and one day when the informant was in the washroom, she caught him peeking through the washroom door. On 25.09.2025 while she was sitting near the gate, the accused No.2 blew her a kiss. The aforesaid gestures from the accused No.2 were totally unexpected to her. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused No.1, in fact, was not involved in the instant matter, however, as a notice was issued to him, he is apprehending arrest in this matter. He submits that the accused No.2 is also not involved with the alleged offence in any manner. He further submits that on 25.09.2025, some local people came to the house of the accused No.2 and assaulted him physically and thereafter, he was arrested by police and after that, he was released on the same day as the matter was settled. However, on the next day, the informant had filed the FIR against the accused/applicants. 5. Leaned counsel appearing for the accused /applicants further submits that since only notices have been issued to them and both the accused are willing to co-operate with the investigation, at this stage, they Page No.# 3/4 may be allowed to go on pre-arrest bail. 6. Learned Government advocate appearing for the State submits that without perusing the case diary, at this stage, pre-arrest bail should not be granted to them. 7. This Court has gone through the FIR as well as the materials placed before this Court. Also heard the submissions made by the learned respective counsel. 8. After considering the whole matter in it’s entirety, this Court is of the view that this is a fit case wherein pre-arrest bail should be granted to the accused/applicants. 9. Accordingly, it is provided that in the event of arrest of the accused/applicants, in connection with above mentioned case, they shall be released on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- each with a suitable surety each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the arresting authority. The direction for pre-arrest bail is subject to the conditions that the accused/applicants: (a) Shall appear before the Investigating Officer within ten days of passing of the order and if requested, they should be given police protection for such appearance. (b) Shall co-operate with the remaining investigation; (c) Shall not hamper or tamper with the evidence of the case. 10. Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application stands allowed and Page No.# 4/4 disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant