Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010037902026 2026:GAU-AS:5721 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/401/2026 SRI SATYA BRATA DAS S/O LT. SITESH CH. DAS R/O H.NO. CEN 1, GEETA PATH, LAL GANESH GHORAJAN GUWAHATI- 781034. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A BHATTACHARYA, MS ANKITA SAHARIA,MR S PAUL,MS. K MALAKAR,MR. A BHATTACHARJEE Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA O R D E R Date : 27.04.2026. Heard Mr. A. Bhattacharya, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Addl. P.P., Assam appearing on behalf of the State respondent. This is an application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of pre- Page No.# 2/4 arrest bail to the accused/petitioner, namely, Satya Brata Das who is apprehending arrest in connection with the Dispur P.S. Case No. 116/2026, registered under Sections 69/351(3)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023. The case diary is received and perused the same. It is submitted by Mr. Bhattacharya, the learned counsel for the petitioner that in pursuant to the order of this Court and in the earlier occasion also, the petitioner appeared before the I.O. his statement is recorded and he is also extending his cooperation in the investigation of the case. He further submitted that as per the recent development, the talk of compromise is going on between the parties and the victim is also no interested to proceed with the case any further. He further submitted that it was within the knowledge of the informant/victim that the petitioner is a married man having children and thus, there is no scope of making any false promise of marriage to attract Section 69 of the BNS, 2023 as well as there is no ingredients also to attract Section 351(3) of the BNS, 2023. However, the petitioner has already extended his cooperation and the process of divorce is also going on between the petitioner and his first wife and as per the instruction, after the divorce, the petitioner is going to marry the informant/victim. Accordingly, the learned counsel submitted that there may not be any necessity for custodial interrogation of the present petitioner. However, he is ready and willing to extend his cooperation as and when it is required. Mr. Borthakur, the learned Addl. P.P., Assam for the State respondent submitted in this regard that the informant/ victim brought the allegation against the present petitioner that he had sexual relationship with her with the promise of Page No.# 3/4 marriage after divorcing his wife. However, from her statement it is also reveals that she is not interest to proceed with the case anymore, as she is not physically well due to her pregnancy. Mr. Borthakur however submitted that the accused petitioner appeared before the I.O. and extended his cooperation after obtaining the interim protection. Considering the submission made by the learned counsel for both sides and other aspects of the case including the materials available in the case diary, this Court is of the opinion that custodial interrogation of the accused petitioner may not be required for further investigation of the case. Accordingly, it is provided that in the event of arrest of the accused/petitioner, namely, Satya Brata Das in connection with the Dispur P.S. Case No. 116/2026, he shall be enlarged on pre-arrest bail on executing a bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) only, with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority, subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer within 7 (seven) days; (ii) that the petitioner shall fully co-operate with the investigation of the case and shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required in connection with the investigation of the aforesaid P.S. case; and (iii) that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her/them from disclosing Page No.# 4/4 such facts to the Court or to any police officer. In terms of above, this bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant