Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010115752026 2026:GAU-AS:10080 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1236/2026 NOOR (MOHAMMAD) SHEIKH ALIAS NOOR SHEIKH S/O LATE AKBAR SHEIKH ALIAS AKBAR ALI,R/O HOUSE NO. 19, PUB BHASKARNAGAR,BAMUNIMAIDAN P.O. BAMUNIMAIDAN,P.S. CHANDMARI,DISTRICT KAMRUP M, ASSAM,PIN 781021. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P S DEKA, MR. D DAS,MR. A CHETRY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. O FARUK (FOR INFORMANT),MR R ISLAM (FOR INFORMANT) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER Date : 22-07-2026 Heard Mr. P. S. Deka, learned counsel for the accused applicant and Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This is an application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023, praying for Page No.# 2/3 grant of pre-arrest bail to the accused applicant in connection with Chandmari P. S. Case No. 48/2026 under Sections 64(1)/127(2)/351(3) of the BNS, 2023. 3. An FIR dated 03.05.2026 was lodged before the Officer-in-Charge, Chandmari Police Station, Guwahati, alleging, inter alia, that the accused applicant is a married man and has a child; that on 31.03.2026, at around 2:30 PM, he informed the informant over the telephone that she might have to help his ailing son. When the informant went to the house of the accused applicant, the accused applicant allegedly came from behind and forcibly raped her and threatened to kill her if she discloses the incident to anyone else. 4. On receipt of the FIR, the police registered the Chandmari P.S. Case No. 48/2026 under the aforementioned sections. 5. Mr. Deka, learned counsel for the accused applicant, submits that the accused applicant and the informant are, in fact, neighbours and that due to certain misunderstandings, miscommunication and extraneous influence, the informant lodged the FIR. He further submits that the informant, after realizing her mistake, filed an application by way of an affidavit before the learned Court of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, No. 4, (F.T.C.), Kamrup (M), wherein she specifically stated that after lodging the FIR, she realized that she had done so under extraneous influence and that she still maintains good relations and feelings towards the accused applicant. 6. The Case Diary in the instant case has been received and the same is perused. 7. Taking into account the fact that the informant has filed an application for no objection before the learned Court of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, No. 4, (F.T.C.), Kamrup (M), in AB No. 104 of 2026, wherein she has Page No.# 3/3 expressed her no objection to the grant of pre-arrest bail to the accused applicant, this Court is of the opinion that the accused applicant should be granted the privilege of pre-arrest bail at this stage. 8. Accordingly, it is directed that, in the event of the arrest of the accused applicant by the arresting authority, in connection with Chandmari P. S. Case No. 48/2026, he shall be released on pre-arrest bail upon furnishing of a bail bond of Rs. 30,000 (Rupees Thirty Thousand) with one surety of like amount, to the satisfaction of the arresting authority, subject to the following conditions: i. that the accused applicant shall appear before the investigating officer within 10 (ten) days from passing of this order; ii. that the accused applicant shall cooperate with the investigation and make himself available before the investigating authority as and when called for; iii. that the accused applicant shall not directly or indirectly try to hamper or tamper with the investigation in the instant case. 9. In view of the above directions, the instant anticipatory bail application stands disposed of as allowed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant