Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010019732026 2026:GAU-AS:4220 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/241/2026 SOHEL MAMUD S/O ROHIM ALI R/O PATAKATA PS. SOUTH SALMARA DIST. SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR, ASSAM, PIN-783127 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A Z AHMED, MR. A KHALEK Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 24-03-2026 Heard Mr. A Z Ahmed, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P Borthakur, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of State respondent. Page No.# 2/3 2. This is an application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 for granting pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, namely, Sohel Mamud in connection with South Salmara P.S. Case No. 11/2026 under Sections 61(2)/64(1)3(5) of BNS, 2023. 3. Case Diary received. Perused the same. 4. It is submitted by Mr. Ahmed, the learned counsel for the petitioner that the present accused/petitioner after obtaining the order of interim pre-arrest bail had already appeared before the I/O, cooperated in the investigation and his statement is also recorded by the I/O. From the contention of the FIR itself it is seen that the relationship was consensual and the accused/petitioner could not marry the victim as he did not even attained the age of 21 years to marry a girl. However, the petitioner is still ready and willing to extend his cooperation in the further investigation of this case, if he is granted with the privilege of pre-arrest bail. 5. Mr. Borthakur, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted in this regard that the accused/petitioner appeared before the I/O and his statement is already recorded. However, he submitted that the victim brought sufficient incriminating materials against the present/petitioner in her statement recorded u/s 183 BNSS. 6. Hearing the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides, considering all aspects of the case, including the materials in the Case Diary, this Court is of the opinion that the custodial interrogation may not be necessary for the interest of investigation and accordingly the petitioner is provided with the privilege of pre-arrest bail. Accordingly the order of interim pre-arrest bail Page No.# 3/3 granted to the petitioner dated 05.02.2026 is hereby made absolute with same terms & conditions. 7. With the above observations, the pre-arrest bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant