Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010023152025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/243/2025 HEMANTA BORAH AND ANR S/O LATE DRONABORAH R/O VILL-KAKAILAURI P.. KAKAILA CHARIALI P.S. GOHPUR DIST. BISHWANATH, ASSAM PIN-784168 2: RITURAJ BARUAH S/O BINOY BARUAH R/O VILL-BARANGABARI P.O. BARANGABARI P.S. HELEM DIST. BISHWANATH PIN-78417 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. SK S N MOHAMMAD, J S AHMED,MR A IKBAL Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA ORDER Date : 13.02.2025 Heard Sk. S. N. Mohammad, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Page No.# 2/3 Mr. P. S. Lahkar, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor appearing for the State respondent. This is an application filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, whereby the petitioner Nos. 1. Hemanta Borah and 2. Rituraj Baruah, have prayed for pre- arrest bail in connection with Panbazar P.S. Case No. 40/2025 under Sections 140(3)/310(1) of the BNS. The wife of the present petitioner Hemanta Borah had eloped with a person, namely, Nabajyoti Rajkhowa and Hemanta Borah has lodged an FIR earlier before police on 17.01.2025. Thereafter, Nabajyoti Rajkhowa lodged an FIR before police on 21.01.2025, alleging that the present petitioner along with some other persons had kidnapped him in a scorepio vehicle. According to Nabajyoti Rajkhowa, he somehow managed to escape by saving his life. In this case, police arrested some persons and those persons have stated before police that Hemanta Borah wanted to kidnap Nabajyoti Rajkhuwa because this person had taken away his wife. After considering the materials available on record, this Court is of the opinion that Nabajyoti Rajkhowa had to lodge the FIR only because the wife of Hemanta Borah had gone with him. The incident that he has narrated in the FIR is the result of the aforesaid act. I have considered the submissions of both sides. Under the given circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner Nos. 1. Hemanta Borah and 2. Rituraj Baruah do not deserve to be detained in custody. As such, the pre-arrest bail application is allowed. Page No.# 3/3 Accordingly, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the petitioners, named above, shall be released on pre-arrest bail, in connection with the above noted case on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- each with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority. Return the case diary. With the aforesaid observation, this application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant