Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 17283 (GAU)

NABAJYOTI LAHON v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

AB/2781/2025 · 2026-01-05

Sanjeev Kumar Sharma

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010260482025 2026:GAU-AS:104 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2781/2025 NABAJYOTI LAHON SON OF SHRI JUGA LAHON RESIDENT OF JOYSAGAR COLLEGE CHARIALI, SIBSAGAR, ASSAM, PIN- 785665 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE LEARNED PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R J DAS, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER 06.01.2026 Heard Mr. R. J. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Addl. PP for the State. 2. This is an application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of Anticipatory bail to the petitioner, namely, Nabajyoti Lahon, in connection with All Women Police Case No. 83/2025 under Section 69/89 of the NBS, 2023. 3. As per the allegation made in the FIR dated 05.11.2025, the petitioner is having a close relationship with the complainant lady and on a promise of marriage she entered into a physical relationship with him, as a result of which, she became pregnant and subsequently, she underwent abortion. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the FIR lodged by the petitioner himself against the complainant much prior to the present FIR wherein certain allegations have been made against her. It is further submitted that the present FIR is a counter blast to the FIR filed by the petitioner. 5. It is submitted by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that charge- sheet in the case has already been filed vide charge-sheet no. 73/2025 dated 10.12.2025. 6. Having regard to the nature of the allegations as available in the FIR, the necessity of taking the petitioner into custody upon his appearance pursuant to any summons that may be issued by the learned Trial Court does not appear to Page No.# 3/3 be necessary. 7. In view of the above, the prayer for interim pre-arrest bail is allowed. The order of interim pre-arrest bail dated 26.11.2025, is hereby made absolute. 8. It is provided that the petitioner shall regularly participate in the trial. 9. In terms of the above observation, this petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant