Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010025712026 2026:GAU-AS:2250 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./400/2026 ABTAHI ZAMAN S/O DR. RANA ZAMAN R/O HOUSE NO.62, RAHMAN MANSION, SOUTH SARANIA, NEAR SOUTH SARANIA MOSQUE,P.S. PALTAN BAZAR, KAMRUP (M), ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A M BORA, MR. M S HUSSAIN,MS. C CHOUDHURY,P MAZUMDAR,MR. D K BAIDYA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. N ANAND BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER Date : 16-02-2026 Heard Mr. A.M. Bora, the learned Sr. Counsel assisted by Mr. D.K. Baidya learned counsel for the accused applicant. Also heard Mr. R.J. Baruah, the learned Addl. P.P., Assam appearing for the State respondent and Mr. N. Anand, learned counsel appearing for the informant. Page No.# 2/5 2. This is an application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, praying for grant of bail to the accused, namely Abtahi Zaman in connection with Dispur P.S. Case No.29/2026 registered under Sections 64/117(2)/351(3) of the BNS, 2023. 3. An FIR was lodged on 18.01.2026 by the informant alleging that the accused applicant got into a relationship with the informant after the informant met her at a common friend’s birthday party sometime in the later part of 2024. Then they started dating each other. On 2nd of February, 2025, it was alleged that the accused applicant took the informant to a homestay near Chandmari and when she refused to have any physical relationship with him, he slapped her and thereafter, raped her. It was also alleged that on 26th of February, 2025, the accused applicant forced her to marry him as per Hindu rites and rituals against her will. Thereafter also, the accused applicant used to physically assault her. It was also alleged that on 12th of March, 2025, the accused applicant forced her to marry him as per the Muslim rituals through a video call with a Maulana. She was allegedly physically assaulted by the accused applicant many a times thereafter. It was alleged that lastly on 8th January, 2026, the accused applicant slapped her and physically assaulted her, which caused severe bleeding and injury to her. On the very date, it was alleged that she ended her relationship with him. It was alleged that after the incident also, the accused applicant used to come to her residence and tried to meet her. He sent various video messages also threatening her with dire consequences if she did not meet him. 4. On receipt of the FIR, police registered Dispur P.S. Case No.29/2026 under the aforementioned Sections. Page No.# 3/5 5. The police arrested the accused applicant on 02.02.2026 and thereafter, he was remanded to police custody for 3 days and thereafter to judicial custody. 6. This Court, vide order dated 11.02.2026 has granted interim bail to the accused applicant till today, i.e., 16.02.2026 and the matter was fixed for further consideration on the production of the case diary. 7. The case diary in the instant case has been produced by the learned Addl. P.P. for the State. 8. The learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the accused applicant submits that this is a typical case, wherein a love affair between two young people has gone sour. He submits that the informant being an educated 22 years’ old girl has voluntarily got into a relationship with the accused applicant, who is 2 years younger to the girl and thereafter, voluntarily had sexual relationship with the accused applicant, which is apparent from the FIR itself. He submits that the statement under Section 183 of the informant has already been recorded and therefore, further custodial detention of the accused applicant in the instant case may not be required. He further submits that in the instant case the Section 48 Notice of BNSS, which is mandatory in nature, has not been served as per mandates of law while arresting the accused applicant by the police. In that count also, he submits that the accused applicant gets an unfettered right to be released on bail. 9. The learned Addl. P.P., on the other hand, submits that the investigation in the instant case, is at a very initial stage and release of the accused applicant at this point of time, may hamper the investigation of the case. He further submits that there are sufficient materials of physical assault as well as forceful sexual intercourse with the informant by the accused applicant, which is prima facie Page No.# 4/5 apparent from the statement of the victim as well as another witness. As far as Section 48 Notice is concerned, he submits that the notice was duly served, as the person who was served with the Section 48 notice was nominated by the accused applicant himself, as he was known to the family of the accused applicant. He further submits that the same had to be served upon the nominated person, as the family members of the accused applicant refused to accept the same. In view of the aforesaid, the learned Addl. P.P. submits that this is not a stage wherein the accused applicant should be granted bail. 10. Mr. N. Anand, learned counsel appearing for the informant supports the submission made by the learned Addl. P.P. and opposes the prayer for bail at this stage. 11. This Court has perused the case diary which has been produced before this Court as well as heard the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties. 12. On consideration of the allegations made in the FIR as well as other materials brought before this Court, it is seen that the accused applicant and the informant were in love relationship and there is no denial of the fact that they were also in a physical relationship, though there are allegations that on certain occasions, the physical intimacies were forceful in nature. It is also seen that the accused applicant is a student aged about 20 years and the informant is also a young girl aged about 22 years. It is natural that in such kind of relationships, occasional fights can happen between the partners, which may not involve any intentional criminal element. It is also seen that the statements of the victim as well as some other witnesses have already been recorded by the Investigating Authority. Page No.# 5/5 13. Having considered all the factual aspects, this Court is of the prima facie view that this is a typical case wherein a consensual relationship has gone sour after passing of some time. Therefore, at this stage, this Court is of the considered view that custodial detention of the accused applicant is not something which cannot be avoided and as such, the accused applicant should be given the privilege of bail at this stage. 14. Having arrived at the aforesaid prima facie finding, this Court does not think that the merit of service of notice under Section 48 of BNSS is required to be gone into. 15. In view of the aforesaid, the interim bail granted, vide order dated 11.02.2026 is made absolute in terms of the aforesaid order. 16. It is made clear that the accused applicant shall cooperate with the investigation and shall not try to hamper or tamper with any evidence which may be involved in the instant case. 17. In the event of violation of any of the conditions of the instant bail application, the Investigating Authority will be at liberty to approach the appropriate Court for cancellation of the bail. 18. In view of the aforesaid directions, this bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant