Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010002582025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/29/2025 MAJIBUR RAHMAN AND 4 ORS S/O AMJAD HUSSAIN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE CHUKULIBARIA, PO CHABOTI, PS NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM 787031 2: MOTIUR RAHMAN S/O AMJAD HUSSAIN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE CHUKULIBARIA PO CHABOTI PS NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST LAKHIMPUR ASSAM 787031 3: AJIJUR RAHMAN S/O AMJAD HUSSAIN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE CHUKULIBARIA PO CHABOTI PS NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST LAKHIMPUR ASSAM 787031 4: AMANUR RAHMAN S/O MAJIBUR RAHMAN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE CHUKULIBARIA PO CHABOTI PS NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST LAKHIMPUR ASSAM 787031 5: MAMTAZ BEGUM @ MOMONI W/O MAJIBUR RAHMAN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE CHUKULIBARIA PO CHABOTI PS NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST LAKHIMPUR ASSAM 78703 Page No.# 2/5 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR ROBIUL HOQUE, MRS. R MOMTAZ,ALHAJJ I UDDIN,MRS. ROMA ENGTIPI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER Date : 24.01.2025 Heard Mr. A.I. Uddin, learned counsel for the applicants. Also heard Ms. N. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. Apprehending arrest in connection with North Lakhimpur P.S. Case No. 398/2024, under Sections 121(2)/118(2)/74/109/3(5) of the BNS, read with Section 4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, this application under Section 482, BNSS is preferred by applicants, namely, Majibur Rahman, Motiur Rahman, Ajijur Rahman, Amanur Rahman and Mamtaz Begum @ Momoni, for grant of pre-arrest bail. 3. It is to be noted here that the aforementioned case has been registered on the basis of an FIR lodged by SI Nabajit Deuri of North Lakhimpur P.S. on 19.12.2024. The essence of allegation against the present applicants is that on 18.12.2024, at about 9:45 p.m., while the informant, along with LNK Rajib Sonowal, WLNK Archana Neog and three other members of armed forces went to investigate a matter in connection with North Lakhimpur P.S. G.D. Entry No. Page No.# 3/5 30, dated 18.12.2024, then 25 persons including the present applicants deterred them from discharging their official duty and also physically assaulted them, and pelted stones to the police vehicle, bearing Registration No. AS-30-7768 and attacked the police personnel with dao, lathi etc., and also caused damage of the back glass of the police vehicle and injured the members of the police team and also outraged the modesty of the woman police personnel by removing their wearing apparels. 4. Mr. Uddin, learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and no way involved with the offence alleged in the FIR. However, Mr. Uddin submits that they were present at the place of occurrence at the relevant time, but they did not participate in the same. Referring to a common bail order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Lakhimpur, dated 10.01.2025, in Criminal Misc. Case No. 236/2024 and Criminal Misc. Case No. 237/2024, Mr. Uddin submits that the police personnel had not suffered from any injury, and that the applicants are ready to cooperate with the investigating agency and therefore, it is contended to allow the application. 5. On the other hand, Ms. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the case diary before this Court and submits that the name of the applicants are mentioned in the FIR and the witnesses examined so far had also implicated them, and that they had caused damaged to the police vehicle and outraged the modesty of the woman police personnel, and that the offences are serious in nature and as such, Ms. Das has opposed the application. 6. Having heard the submissions of learned Advocates of both sides, I have gone through the application and the documents placed on record and also perused the case diary with the assistance of Ms. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor. Page No.# 4/5 7. It appears that the I.O. has collected sufficient incriminating materials against the applicants and the name of the applicants also finds mention in the FIR dated 19.12.2024, except however, the applicant No. 2, namely, Motiur Rahman, and the witnesses also implicated them. It also appears from the MVI report that damages were caused to the police vehicle, bearing Registration No. AS-30-7768, and the statement of the woman police personnel recorded under Section 180 of the BNSS, indicates that she was physically assaulted and her wearing apparels were dragged for outraging her modesty. Further, it appears that investigation is still going on and the offences are against the public order and safety. 8. Thus, considering the nature and gravity of the offence as well as the materials collected so far in the case diary, this Court is of the view that this is not a fit case where the privilege of pre-arrest bail can be granted to the applicant No. 1, Majibur Rahman; applicant No. 3, Ajijur Rahman and applicant No. 4, Amanur Rahman and accordingly, their prayer stands rejected. 9. However, in view of the materials collected far in the case diary, in respect of applicant No. 2, Motiur Rahman and applicant No. 5, Mamtaz Begum @ Momoni, being a woman, their custodial interrogation seems to be not warranted here in this case and therefore, this Court is inclined to allow their prayer. 10. Accordingly, it is provided that in the event of arrest of the applicant No. 2, Motiur Rahman and applicant No. 5, Mamtaz Begum @ Momoni in connection with North Lakhimpur P.S. Case No. 398/2024, under Sections 121(2)/118(2)/74/109/3(5) of the BNS, read with Section 4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, they shall be released on pre-arrest bail on executing a bond of Rs. 50,000/- each, with one surety of like amount each Page No.# 5/5 to the satisfaction of the arresting authority. The above privilege is, however, subject to the following conditions: (i) They shall make themselves available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required; (ii) They shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and (iii) They shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned C.J.M., Lakhimpur, North Lakhimpur without prior permission. 11. In terms of above, this application stands disposed of. 12. Case diary be returned. JUDGE Comparing Assistant