Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 12030 (GAU)

PINTU DAS @ RAJESH DAS v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

AB/1415/2026 · 2026-08-11

Sanjeev Kumar Sharma

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010126772026 2026:GAU-AS:11385 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1415/2026 PINTU DAS @ RAJESH DAS SON OF NARAYAN DAS, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE P.O. SADARASHI, P.S. AND DISTRICT SRIBHUMI, ASSAM, PIN-788710. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H R CHOUDHURY, Z HUSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER 12.08.2026 Heard Mr. H.R. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R.J. Boruah, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This is an application filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 for granting bail to the petitioner in connection with PRC Case No. 2362/2024 (G.R. Case No. Page No.# 2/3 1194/2024) arising out of Karimganj P.S. Case No. 387/2024 under Section 366- A/34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class-II, Sribhumi. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the victim who was aged about 16 years at the time of occurrence was taken away by the accused/petitioner while she was on her way for her tuition on 08.06.2024 and subsequently, she was recovered about 3 to 4 days later after lodging of the FIR. 4. The investigation of the case has been completed. 5. The petitioner has received summons and apprehends arrest upon his appearance before the Court. 6. Perusal of the statement of the victim before the Magistrate indicates the present one to be the case of elopement on account of a love affair between the victim and the accused/petitioner. 7. Charge-sheet has been submitted under Section 366A/34 of IPC against the present petitioner as no evidence was found against the other two accused persons who have been named in the FIR. 8. Having regard to the nature of the allegations and the fact of completion of investigation, there appears to be no necessity of the petitioner being taken into custody at this stage. 9. Accordingly, the prayer for pre-arrest bail is allowed. Page No.# 3/3 10. The petitioner in the event of his arrest in connection with the aforesaid case is directed to be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. 11. The petition stands allowed accordingly. JUDGE Comparing Assistant