Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010005292026 2026:GAU-AS:2984 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/74/2026 INTAJUL ALI S/O- MANSUR ALI, R/O-BURAHDAICHAPARA P.O.- BURHA, P.S- SIPAJHAR, DIST.- DARRANG, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR M AHMED, MR A. ALI,N. CHOUDHURY,A. K. KANU Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA O R D E R Date : 26.02.2026. Heard Mr. M. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, 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- arrest bail to the accused/petitioner, namely, Intajul Ali who is apprehending Page No.# 2/3 arrest in connection with the Dispur P.S. Case No. 186/2025, registered under Sections 69 of the BNS, 2023. The case diary is received and perused the same. It is submitted by Mr. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner that with some false and concocted allegations, the FIR has been lodged against the present petitioner though it is a fact that there were some relationships between the victim and the petitioner but there was no such physical relationship between them as alleged by her. However, after obtaining the order of interim pre-arrest bail, the petitioner appeared before the I.O. and co-operating with the investigation of the case. He is still ready and willing to extend his cooperation in further investigation of this case, if he is granted with the privilege of pre- arrest bail. Mr. Sarma, the learned Addl. P.P., Assam submitted in this regard that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, brought sufficient allegations against the present petitioner showing his involvement in the alleged offence. However, the learned Addl. P.P., Assam submitted that the accused petitioner appeared before the I.O., after obtaining the order of interim pre- arrest bail and his statement is also recorded. Hearing the submissions made by the learned counsels for both sides, I have also perused the case record and considering the materials in the case diary and other aspects of the case, if find that custodial interrogation of the accused petitioner may not be required for the purpose of investigation. In view of this, I find it a fit case to extend the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the Page No.# 3/3 accused petitioner and accordingly, the order of interim pre-arrest bail dated 09.01.2026 is hereby made absolute with same terms and conditions. This bail petition stands disposed of accordingly. JUDGE Comparing Assistant