Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010134062026 2026:GAU-AS:10511 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1824/2026 OXFORD MUCHAHARY ALIAS MUSHAHARY S/O NIRMAL MUCHAHARY, R/O VILLAGE-BELGURI, P.S. MUSHALPUR, DISTRICT BAKSA, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PROSECUTOR, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P K DAS, MR. M BARUAH Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 30.07.2026 Heard Mr. N.J. Daimari, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. P.K. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. By this application, the petitioner has prayed for bail in connection Page No.# 2/3 with Kokrajhar P.S. Case No. 79/2026, registered under Section 69 of the BNS, 2023. 3. The FIR in connection with which the petitioner has been arrayed as an accused and was arrested was lodged by the victim herself on 02.06.2026, stating inter alia that she was in relationship with the petitioner and that the petitioner had proposed marriage to her and with the said promise, the petitioner used to visit his house occasionally. She further alleged that taking advantage of the absence of other family members at home, the petitioner had engaged in sexual relationship with the victim. She further alleged that petitioner is no longer in relationship with her and that he had refused to marry her. The police on conclusion of the investigation had submitted charge sheet against the petitioner on 17.06.2026. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the trial has commenced in respect of the instant case and that the petitioner is inside the jail since 03.06.2026. He submits that there is no false promise to marry on the part of the petitioner. He further submits that the marriage was fixed between the petitioner and the victim and the families had also met but due to some other reasons, the marriage could not be solemnized. 5. Mr. B. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor however submits that the ingredients of Section 69 BNS is clearly mentioned in the said FIR. 6. Upon consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsels and on perusal of the FIR itself, it is seen that the victim herself had stated that currently the petitioner is no longer in relationship with her and has denied to marry her. The victim had not stated anywhere in the FIR Page No.# 3/3 that from the inception, the petitioner had no intention to marry and had given her false promises. 7. In view of the same, it is directed that the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing of a bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned District and Sessions Judge, Kokrajhar. 8. The direction for bail is further subject to the conditions: (a) The petitioner will not approach the victim at any point of time; (b) The petitioner will appear before the learned trial court as and when called for; (c) The petitioner will not influence the witnesses connected to the case; and (d) The petitioner will not leave the place of his residence without the permission of the learned trial court. 9. However, the observation made in this order will not affect the trial of the case. 10. The bail petition stands allowed and disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant