Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010212282026 2026:GAU-AS:14408 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2405/2026 DHRUBA JYOTI RAJBONGSHI ALIAS DHRUBAJYOTI RAJBONGSHI S/O MAHESH RAJBONGSHI, RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO. 18, NEAR POSTAL TRAINING CENTRE, BOKULBAN PATH, P.S. BASISHTA, GUWAHATI, DISTRICT KAMRUP METRO, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A CHAUDHURY, MR. D BORA,MR. N MAHAJAN,MR. P K DAS Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 28.09.2026 1. Heard Mr. B.K. Mahajan, learned counsel assisted by Mr. N. Mahajan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned APP appearing for the State of Assam. Page No.# 2/3 2. By this application the petitioner has prayed for grant of pre-arrest bail in connection with Basistha P.S. Case No. 355/2026 registered under Sections 76/331(4)/140(3)/115(2)/308(2)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023. 3. The FIR in connection with which the petitioner apprehends arrest was lodged by the wife of the petitioner stating inter alia that on the instructions of her husband, i.e., the petitioner one of his friends entered her house and forcibly took her to a rehabilitation centre at Dispur. She further stated that her sister was also taken away towards Arunachal Pradesh, however, when her sister explained the situation to the persons who had taken her, they brought her to the police station. The informant further stated that during the process of taking her away she called her father but found his mobile phone switched off. She also contacted her cousin sister and learnt that her father was not at home. She therefore stated that her father was missing and that the staff of the rehabilitation centre had brought her and her sister to the police station. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the father of the informant was at the rehabilitation centre and was subsequently recovered there from as stated in the forwarding report in respect of the friend of the petitioner. He further submits that the only allegation against the petitioner in the FIR is that he had instructed his friend to take his wife to the rehabilitation centre for her betterment. 5. Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned APP on the other hand submits that it was the petitioner who had instructed his friend to take the victim from her house to the rehabilitation centre. He accordingly prays for calling for the case diary. 6. Upon consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the Page No.# 3/3 parties, more so in view of the fact that the only allegation against the petitioner is that he had instructed his friend to take his wife to the rehabilitation centre for her betterment, this Court is inclined to grant the petitioner pre-arrest 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 Arresting Authority subject to the following conditions: (i) The petitioner shall positively appear before the Investigating Officer within a period of 15 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. 7. Accordingly, this Anticipatory Bail application is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant