Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010031142026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/336/2026 MUZAMMIL HOQUE S/O- HABIBAR RAHMAN VILL- JAWKATA DIA P.O- DEKACHANG P.S- BOKO DIST. KAMRUPASSAM PIN-781136. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M U MONDAL, MR A ALIM SK,A A AHMED,MR. A W MONDAL Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 11.03.2026 Heard Mr. Al. Alim Sk, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. M.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam. 2. By this application the petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Page No.# 2/4 Boko Police Station Case No. 50/2026 registered under Sections 77/78(2)/64(1)/62/351(3)/3(5) of BNS, 2023 read with Section 67(A) of the I.T. Act. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he had file the instant bail application when police had gone to his house to arrest him a number of times and unable to find the FIR showing his complicity, he filed this anticipatory bail and during the course of the proceedings the learned Additional Public Prosecutor got the information that FIR has been lodged. To which the petitioner verified and found that the FIR has been lodged after the bail application has been filed. 4. The FIR which is annexed with the additional affidavit reveals that accused No.1 who is the petitioner herein had taken photographs of the informant when she was lying on a bed and shared the same with her WhatsApp group. 5. The informant further stated that her half necked photo was made viral in the social media by the petitioner. And that the petitioner went to her house and forcibly tried to make physical relationship with her. 6. Mr. Al. Alim Sk, learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that there is nothing in the evidence to show that it was the petitioner who had made the photographs of the informant viral since in the FIR nothing has been stated to substantiate the fact. He submits that there was another person who had used the photographs and made it viral. 7. Mr. M.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam submits that the witnesses have stated that the petitioner have made viral the half necked photographs of the informant and that the Page No.# 3/4 Investigating Officer has seized the photographs from one of the member of the WhatsApp group. 8. On consideration of the submissions made at the bar, moreso in absence of materials showing that it was the petitioner who had made the photographs viral, this Court finds it fit that the petitioner be released on pre-arrest bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand ) only with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting authority on the following conditions: 1. That the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 10(ten) days from today and such other dates as required and co-operate in the investigation as and when required; 2. The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the police station, without prior written permission from Officer-in-Charge, Boko Police Station. 3. That the petitioner shall not hamper or tamper with the investigation in any manner; and 4. That the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person/witness acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer in connection to this Police Station Case. If any of the conditions are found to be violated by the petitioner then the Page No.# 4/4 Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of the interim bail granted to the petitioner. 9. Accordingly, the bail petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant