Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010150312026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1684/2026 PUSHPA BORA S/O LATE DIMBESWAR BORA VILLAGE 2 NO. KAKI DIFOLU GAON P.S. KAKIDISTRICT HOJAI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : TAWHID LASKAR, MS. S NISHA SULTANA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER Date : 17-08-2026 Heard Mr. T. Laskar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard K. Baishya, learned Addl. P.P appearing for the State. 2. This is an application under Section 482 BNSS, 2023 praying for granting anticipatory bail to the accused/petitioner, Pushpa Bora who is apprehending arrest in connection with Kaki P.S Case No. Page No.# 2/4 06/2026 under Section 61(2)/75/76/109(1)BNS (section 62 of the BNS, 2023 subsequently added vide order dated 16.03.2026). 3. The gist of the allegations in the FIR lodged by the alleged victim women is about cruelty, harassment, torture by her husband and his family members being father-in-law and mother-in-law. With regard to the present petitioner who stated to be the father-in-law of the informant, there are two specific allegations - that he tried to exploit her sexually when she revealed to him about her problems from her husband and on another occasion, he actually committed sexual assault upon her. 4. The learned counsel Mr. Laskar submits that pursuant to the registration of the case, the husband was already arrested and subsequently released on bail after more than 20 days in detention. 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel that the allegations against the present petitioner being the father-in-law are false and concocted and that the informant has invented a story to implicate the whole family. 6. The Case Diary as called for has been received. 7. Mr. K. Baishya, the Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, submits that the allegations against the petitioner being the father-in-law of the informant are rather serious. 8. It is submitted by the prosecution that in her statement recorded before learned JMFC, the informant has supported the allegations leveled against her father-in-law. It is submitted by the prosecution that the petitioner would not be deserving of being granted pre- Page No.# 3/4 arrest bail. 9. In this context, however, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is willing to render full co-operation to the investigation and therefore, he should be given the protection of pre- arrest bail and allowed to participate in the investigation. 10. I have perused the materials, including that of the case diary and considered the submissions. 11. The statements of the informant-cum-victim, as well as several other witnesses have been recorded before learned Magistrate during investigation. The informant-cum-victim in her such statement has lent support to her allegations in general, including the allegations against the petitioner stated to be her father-in-law. The statements of some other witnesses, both before learned Magistrate as well as before Police have stated about the victim woman coming to their place in highly disturbed emotional state and also stated about finding smell of fuel from her body. 12. The seizure witness has also revealed similar implications. From the materials revealed from the investigation, including the statements before the learned Magistrate prima facie, there appears to be some force in the allegations made by the informant in the FIR. Investigation is in progress. 13. The allegations against the present petitioner are serious and of a disturbing nature. In the circumstances, granting of pre-arrest bail may not be the best interest of the investigation. 14. Accordingly, the bail petition stands rejected, at this stage. 15. Return the Case Dairy. Nothing stated in the bail order shall be Page No.# 4/4 taken as expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, especially if it progresses to trial. JUDGE Comparing Assistant