Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010188572026 2026:GAU-AS:12842 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2086/2026 SRI THANESWAR DIHINGIA S/O LATE JATIN DIHINGIA R/O BANGALMARI AHOM GAON P.S./DISTRICT- DHEMAJI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY P.P., ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. U J SAIKIA, MS M DAS Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 03.09.2026 1. Heard Mr. U.J. Saikia, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sharma, learned APP appearing for the State of Assam. 2. By this application, the petitioner has prayed for the grant of pre-arrest bail in connection with Dhemaji P.S. Case No. 134 of 2026 registered under Sections 329(3)/74/75(2) of the BNS, 2023. Page No.# 2/3 3. The FIR in connection with which the petitioner is apprehending arrest was lodged on 12.08.2026 by the informant stating inter alia that taking advantage of her husband’s absence as he was working outside Assam, the petitioner used to talk to her with bad intentions. It was further alleged that on 11.08.2026 at about 11:30 a.m./p.m., the petitioner entered her house without permission and when she went to see who had entered he allegedly caught hold of her from behind and dragged her towards the bed with an intention to fulfill his illicit desires. She further stated that upon her raising an alarm, the neighbours came out whereupon the petitioner fled from the house through the back door. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that at the time of the alleged occurrence the petitioner was present at the school. It is further submitted that at around noon a group of persons went to the school and confronted the petitioner. 5. Mr. B. Sharma, learned APP however, submits that the order rejecting the petitioner’s application for anticipatory bail passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Dhemaji records that the neighbours had seen the petitioner running out of the house of the victim. 6. Upon consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsels and more particularly, in view of the discrepancies in the FIR as well as the lack of clarity regarding the time of the alleged occurrence, this Court deems it fit to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Authority subject to the following conditions: (i) The petitioner shall positively appear before the Investigating Officer Page No.# 3/3 within a period of 10 days from today and corporate with the investigation without any failure. (ii) The petitioner shall not hamper and tamper with the evidence of the case, and/or influence the witness connected with the case; and (iii) The petitioner shall not leave their residence without prior permission of the I.O. 7. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant