Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010244512025 2025:GAU-AS:14962 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2642/2025 SAHIL DAS S/O LATE NIRAJ DAS R/O BORIGAON, JORHAT P.O. AND P.S. JORHAT DIST. JORHAT, ASSAM, PIN-785001 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM TO BE PRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. J C GOGOI, MR. S ALI,MR B ISLAM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER 06.11.2025 1. Heard Mr. B. Islam, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, 1. Sahil Das has prayed for pre- arrest bail in connection with Jorhat P.S Case No. 526/2025 registered under Sections 118(2)/3(5) of BNS, 2023 (Corresponding to G.R Case No.792/2025). 3. The allegation in the FIR that was lodged on 27.09.2025 is that one informant, Daniel Borah was assaulted by 4/5 boys including the accused petitioner and thereby, caused serious injuries to the informant. 4. On receipt of the FIR, the police has registered Jorhat P.S Case No. 526/2025 under the aforementioned Sections. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations that has been made against the accused petitioner is false and actually, the accused petitioner is in love with a girl and when he went to celebrate a birthday party of the girl, the informant, who supposedly also in love with the girl got jealous and thereafter, a quarrel took place between the accused petitioner and Page No.# 3/4 the informant. 6. Though the informant got hurt but injury is not of grievous nature. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has already applied for pre-arrest bail before the learned Sessions Judge, Jorhat, which was rejected on 29.10.2025, wherein, it has been specifically mentioned that the injury received by the informant is of simple injury and not grievous injury. 7. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State submits that the investigation is at an initial stage and without perusing the case diary at this stage, pre-arrest bail should not be granted to the petitioner. 8. This Court has gone through the materials brought before this Court and also heard the submissions made by the respective counsels. 9. On consideration of the materials brought before this Court and taking into the whole aspect in it’s entirety, this Court is of the view that this is a fit case to grant interim pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. 10. Therefore, in the interim, in the event of his arrest in connection with this case, the above-named petitioner shall be allowed to go on bail of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) only with one surety of the like nature subject to the satisfaction of the arresting authority with following conditions: (i) That the petitioner shall appear before the I.O within a period of 10 (ten) days from passing of this order; Page No.# 4/4 (ii) That the petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation and shall make himself available for examination as when and required; (iii) That the petitioner shall not hamper or tamper with evidence. 11. Accordingly, this anticipatory bail petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant