Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010193752026 2026:GAU-AS:13010 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2142/2026 SHRI KOILASH MIZAR ALIAS KAILASH MIZAR S/O LATE GOPAL MIZAR, R/O VILLAGE BOGIJULI PATHAR, P.O. BEDETI, PIN 784179, P.S. BEHALI, DISTRICT BISWANATH, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P BORDOLOI, MS M NIROLA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 08.09.2026 1. Heard Mr. P. Bordoloi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned APP appearing for the State of Assam. 2. By this application, the petitioner has prayed for grant of pre-arrest bail in connection with an enquiry pursuant to Behali P.S. G.D. Entry No. 15/2026 Page No.# 2/3 dated 30.08.2026. 3. The petitioner's case is that an intimation was given by the police personnel of Behali Police Station to the Commandant of the 5th Battalion, CO HN Headquarters, Pabhoi stating that the petitioner who was serving under the said Commandant was required to appear before the Officer-in-Charge of Behali Police Station on a specified date. 4. It was also intimated that the said appearance was required in connection with a written complaint submitted by one Kalpana Tokbi wherein she alleged that she had been in a relationship with the petitioner for about two years. She further alleged that having been assured by the petitioner that he would marry her, she entered into a physical relationship with him. However, she subsequently stated that the petitioner refused to marry her, which caused her distress and hardship. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that to attract the offence under Section 69 of the BNS, 2023 there must be an allegation that the accused by inducing the other party on the basis of a false promise of marriage caused her to enter into a physical relationship with him. He submits that the ingredients of the said offence are not made out from the allegations contained in the said intimation. 6. On the other hand, Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned APP appearing for the State submits that the petitioner had promised to marry the complainant but subsequently refused to marry her thereby causing immense hardship to the alleged victim. He further submits that the GD Entry was made for the purpose Page No.# 3/3 of conducting an enquiry and that the petitioner was called upon to appear and answer certain allegations during the course of such enquiry. 7. Upon consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, more so in view of the fact that there is a written complaint submitted by the victim concerned and that the petitioner was called upon to appear for an enquiry in connection therewith, this Court finds it fit to enlarge the petitioner on pre-arrest bail upon 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 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 his residence without prior permission of the Investigating Officer. 8. Accordingly, this Anticipatory Bail application is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant