Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010070382026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/738/2026 JONASING TISSO S/O- SRI MONGOLSING TISSO R/O- KATHALGURI PS SAMAGURI, DIST- NAGAON, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. PADMINI BARUA, MR N K KAKATI,MS. RUKMINI BARUA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 24.08.2026 Heard Ms. P. Barua, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Baishya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam. 2. This is an application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 whereby the petitioner, namely, Jonasing Tisso is seeking Anticipatory Bail apprehending arrest in connection with an FIR, which is registered as Samaguri Police Station Page No.# 2/3 Case No. 36/2026 registered under Sections 329(4)/64(1) of BNS, 2023. 3. The FIR in connection with which the petitioner is apprehending arrest was lodged by the victim herself, stating, inter alia, that on 14.01.2026, the petitioner who is her neighbour entered her room at around 7 pm when there was no one in the house and while she tried to escape, she was overpowered and that the petitioner committed rape upon her. She also alleged that she kept on pleading with him to leave her alone but he forcefully committed the said act. 4. Ms. P. Barua, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the facts of the case is that the petitioner and the victim were in a love relationship and when the victim pressurized the petitioner to marry her and the petitioner refused because of his financial constraints, there was a tussle between the petitioner and the victim and the victim as a counter lodged the ejahar. She submits that the petitioner is no way involved in the offence as alleged by the by the victim. 5. Mr. K. Baishya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam upon perusal of the case diary submits that victim had stated about the relationship between her and the petitioner in her statement before the police but in her statement or before the Magistrate she had denied the same and stated that she was raped by the petitioner. 6. However, it is also noticed that the petitioner was enlarged on interim pre- arrest bail by this Court vide order dated 06.04.2026 on the condition that the petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and shall appear before the investigating officer for recording his statement. It is seen that the petitioner appeared before the investigating officer and his statement was recorded and the investigating officer on completion of the investigation had submitted the Page No.# 3/3 charge-sheet before the Court. 7. It is also seen that the victim had given two different statements before the police as well as the Magistrate. 8. In view of the same, this Court deems it fit to make the order dated 06.04.2026 absolute with the further condition that the petitioner would comply with the conditions mentioned in the said interim order. 9. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant