Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010239192025 2025:GAU-AS:16091 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2606/2025 ZIYABUR RAHMAN S/O SATTAR ALI, R/O PALAHARTARI, P.S. NAGARBERA, DIST. KAMRUP, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S HOQUE, MS R P DAS Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER Date : 26.11.2025 1. Heard Mr. S Hoque, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D.P Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. 2. This is an application u/s 482 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner namely Ziyabur Rahman in connection with Nagarbera P.S Case No. 71/2025 u/s 64(2((k)/64(2)(m) of BNS, 2023. Page No.# 2/3 3. The allegations stated in the FIR is that one Rahim Ali, son of Late Sarpat Ali, lodged an FIR on 19-10-2025 before the Officer-in-Charge, Nagarbera Police Station, alleging inter alia that he has one physically disabled daughter (22 years) namely Rashida Khatun. He has been often residing outside for his work as labour. It is also stated that since last one month his wife Ayzan Khatun has been informing him that their daughter's health condition is bad. As their daughter is unmarried so they thought about generalphysical ill condition, but thereafter they came to know from Aasha worker that their daughter is five months pregnant. It is also stated that after getting the information while they have been asking their daughter from many days that who had committed such type of act then she informed her mother about the details by way of indication. It is also alleged that their daughter went to the house of the aforesaid accused person and indicated him in front of all. Their daughter also informed them that the petitioner has committed such acts five times with her by taking the advantage that while no one was available at home and as a result she becomes five months pregnant. Accordingly a case was registered vide Nagarbera P. S. Case No. 71 /2025 U/S 64(2)(k)/ 64(2)(m) of B.N.S., 2023 and started investigation. Hence, the case. 4. Case Diary, as called for, has been received. 5. On perusal of the Case Diary, it appears that the alleged victim has fully implicated the petitioner in her statement before the Ld. Magistrate which was recorded with the help of an interpreter as the victim is deaf and dumb. Her statement before the I/O is also consistent. 6. Although, it has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the present FIR has been lodged due to the refusal of the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- that was demanded from him by two village diwanis and according to the petitioner, the same kind of demand was made from another person and as he had paid the amount, the said other person Page No.# 3/3 was not named in the FIR. But, there is no material in the Case Diary to support the aforesaid contention of the petitioner. 7. Having regard to the grievous nature of the alleged offence and the materials available in the Case Diary, this cannot be considered to be a fit case for grant of pre-arrest bail. 8. Accordingly, the prayer for pre-arrest bail stands rejected. 9. Send back the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant