Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010191542025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2044/2025 TAMAL PAUL S/O LATE AMAL PAUL R/OMARGHERITA NEAR BABUL HALL CHARIALI, P.O. AND P.S. MARGHERITA, DIST. TINSUKIA, ASSAM,PIN-786181 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR B P BORAH, MR H MAZUMDER Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER Date : 27.11.2025 Heard learned counsel Mr. H. Mazumder for the petitioner Sri Tamal Paul, who has filed this application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 with prayer for pre-arrest bail as he is apprehending arrest in connection with PRC Case No. 234/2025 arising out of Margherita P.S. Case No. 63/2025 under Section 64 of the BNS, pending before the learned court of Judicial Page No.# 2/3 Magistrate 1st Class, Margherita. 2. Heard Mr. K. K. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam. 3. The allegation against the petitioner is that he has continuously threatened the victim and exercised pressure and forcefully committed rape on her on several occasions. 4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the allegation against the petitioner relates to incidents commencing from July, 2021, whereas the FIR was lodged after 4 (four) years, i.e, on 24.05.2025. It is also submitted that the victim had a love relationship with the petitioner, and as the petitioner is not willing to marry the victim, a false case has been slammed against him. 5. On the contrary, Mr. K. K. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, has raised serious objection, stating that the statement of the victim under Section 183 of BNSS clearly reveals that the victim could not approach the police, as she was blackmailed with certain objectionable photographs taken by the petitioner. This resulted in the delay in lodgment of the FIR. As a prima facie case has been found against the petitioner, charge sheet has been laid against him. Witnesses are yet to be examined, and the conduct of the petitioner reveals that he may influence the witnesses. 6. I have considered the submissions at the bar with circumspection. I have also considered the submission that the petitioner has appeared before the learned Trial Court as directed by this court vide order dated 27.08.2025. The petitioner is willing to abide by any stringent bail conditions if imposed upon him. The merits of this case are not brought to the fore. 7. It appears that anticipatory bail may be granted to the petitioner. The petitioner is a local resident, and he is not a flight risk. The order dated Page No.# 3/3 27.08.2025 is hereby made absolute under the conditions that: (i) The petitioner shall not go anywhere near the vicinity of the victim till the completion of the trial, (ii) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission till completion of trial, and (iii) The petitioner shall not exercise threats to the victim or any other witnesses. 8. On breach of any of the bail conditions, the Court is at liberty to immediately cancel the anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner. 9. Send back the TCR. JUDGE Comparing Assistant