Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010210362026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2928/2026 MUSTT SHAHNAZ BEGUM ALIAS SHWANAJ BEGUM D/O- MAINUDDIN, R/O- VILL. BORGHALI NO.3, P.S.- ULUANI, DIST NAGAON, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S M ABDULLAH P, MR. J JAKARIA,MR. MD IMDAD,MD IMRAN,MD R ISLAM,MS F HUSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 24.09.2026 1. Heard Mr. S.M. Abdullah P., 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 the grant of bail in connection with Uluani P.S. Case No. 58/2026 registered under Sections Page No.# 2/3 61(2)/308(2)/318(4)/351(3) of the BNS, 2023. 3. The FIR in connection with which the petitioner was arrested, was lodged by the victim himself on 12.09.2026 stating inter alia that he had become friendly with the petitioner and that they had developed intimacy with each other. However, the victim alleged that thereafter the petitioner started threatening him by using recordings of some of their personal telephone conversations and further threatened to ruin his reputation. It was further alleged that the petitioner demanded money from him and that in this connection, the victim had paid an amount of Rs.65,000/- to the petitioner. He further stated that even after receiving the said amount, the petitioner continued to threaten him and demanded further payment. The victim also alleged that the petitioner had similarly threatened other persons in the past and had taken money from them. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that admittedly there was a relationship between the petitioner and the victim. However, there was no demand for any money from the victim. He therefore submits that the story narrated in the FIR is a concocted one. He further submits that the petitioner is a woman and has minor children. 5. On the other hand, Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned APP submits that the allegations narrated in the FIR are serious in nature and that a substantial amount of money was extracted from the informant by the petitioner as alleged therein. He further submits that the case diary may be called for within a short date to ascertain the extent of complicity of the petitioner. 6. On consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, more so, in view of the fact that the petitioner is a woman and the Page No.# 3/3 exception carved out in the first proviso to Section 480 of the BNSS is applicable, this Court deems it fit to enlarge the petitioner on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned SDJM, Kaliabor, Nagaon subject to the following conditions: (i) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for, (ii) The petitioner shall not hamper and tamper with the evidence of the case, and/or influence the witnesses; and (iii) The petitioner shall not leave his place of residence without the prior permission of the Investigating Officer. 7. Accordingly, this Bail Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant