Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010231472025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2516/2025 SRI SANJIB SAHA SON OF LATE SAMARESH SAHA RESIDENT OF MEDHIPARA WARD NO. 2 PO AND PS BASUGAON DIST. CHIRANG, BTC, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B J MUKHERJEE, MS R SAHA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER 07.11.2025 1. Heard Mr. B. J. Mukherjee, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. S. H. Bora, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam appearing for the State respondent. 2. This petition under Section 482 BNSS is filed for granting the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, namely, Sanjib Saha, apprehending arrest in Page No.# 2/3 connection with Bongaigaon P.S. Case No. 259/2025 registered u/s 123/76 /351(2)/296/3(5) of BNS, 2023 (corresponding to GR No. 493/25). 3. The Case diary, as called for, is received. 4. The allegation in the FIR is that on 05.10.2025 at about 4.30 pm the FIR named accused No.1 took the informant/lady to an unknown house and later on an unknown person gave her some medicine and upon smelling the same she became unconscious. When she woke up, she found herself in half necked condition and after asking the matter to the petitioner No.1 about the incident the accused along with five other persons threatened her by coming to her house. 5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner had appeared before the IO and in view of his own statement before the IO, his involvement is apparent. He has also been implicated by other co-accused and prayed that the prayer for bail may be rejected. 6. On the other hand, leaned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the fact that the petitioner upon his appearance before the IO has candidly stated the facts and thereby co-operated with the investigation, his custodial interrogation may not be necessary. He further submitted that the petitioner will participate in the trial where his guilt or innocence will be proved. 7. Having regard to the nature of the allegation and the fact that the petitioner has been co-operating with the investigation, his custodial interrogation may not be necessary. 8. Accordingly, the prayer for pre-arrest bail is allowed and the order dated Page No.# 3/3 27.10.2025 is hereby made absolute on the same conditions. 9. Return the case diary. 10. This disposes of the anticipatory bail application. JUDGE Comparing Assistant