Page No.# 1/4 GAHC040002982026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : AB/19/2026 Linggo Taki @ Lego Son of Late Tarung Taki, permanent resident of Runne Village, PO and PS Pasighat, East Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh. VERSUS The State of AP represented by the PP of AP Advocate for the Petitioner : Vijay Jamoh, Abanso Gamre,B Padung Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER Date : 05.03.2026 Heard Mr. V. Jamoh, learned counsel for the accused applicant. Also heard Ms. T. Jini, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State. 2. This is an application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying for grant of pre-arrest bail to the accused applicant, Shri Linggo Taki @ Lego in connection with Pasighat P.S. Case No.05/2026, registered under Section 69 of BNS, 2023. Page No.# 2/4 3. An FIR was lodged on 06.02.2026, which was registered on 27.02.2026 by the Officer-in-Charge, Women Police Station, Pasighat, by the informant alleging, inter alia, that she entered into a relationship with the accused applicant on 17.02.2025 and from the very beginning the accused applicant represented to her that he would marry her; that on the basis of such promise, the informant got involved in a physical relationship with the accused applicant; that the families of the accused applicant as well as the informant were aware of their relationship and, in fact, they had been staying as husband and wife; that however, suddenly, in January 2026, the accused applicant started avoiding her and abandoned her after sexually exploiting her; that a village Mel was called wherein the families of both the parties were present. However, nothing could be arrived at in the Mel as the accused applicant was adamant about not marrying her. 4. On the basis of the aforesaid FIR, the Police registered Pasighat Women P.S. Case No.05/2026 under the aforementioned sections against the accused applicant. 5. The learned counsel for the accused applicant submits that the informant is a 33 year old lady and that she, in fact, entered into a relationship with the accused applicant without disclosing her past, as she was a married woman with a child of 5 years. He submits that the accused applicant was not aware of such past of the informant and, though he entered into a relationship with her, there was no promise from his side to marry her. However, upon realizing that the informant was already married and that her marriage was still subsisting, he refused to marry her. Therefore, he submits that no offence has been committed by him. However, since the FIR has been filed, he is apprehending arrest; therefore, he has approached this Court by way of the instant pre-arrest bail Page No.# 3/4 application. He further submits that the accused applicant will fully cooperate with the investigation in the event the prayer is allowed. 6. Ms. Jini, learned Addl. P.P., on the other hand, submits that the Case Diary in the instant case should be considered before allowing the prayer of the accused applicant. 7. This Court has heard the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and also considered the materials that have been brought before this Court by way of this application. 8. On consideration of the entire facts of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that, at this stage, the accused applicant should be given the privilege of pre-arrest bail. 9. Accordingly, it is directed that, in the event of the arrest of the accused applicant, he shall be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with one surety of the like nature to the satisfaction of the Investigating Authority, subject to the following conditions: (i) that the accused applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer within a period of 10(ten) days of passing of this order and shall cooperate with the investigation; (ii) that the accused applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person who may be acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts before the Investigating Officer; and (iii) that the accused applicant shall not hamper or temper with the Page No.# 4/4 investigation in any manner. 10. In view of the aforesaid directions, the instant anticipatory bail application is disposed of as allowed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant