Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010002662026 2026:GAU-AS:3675 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/22/2026 SHRI BIREN NATH S/O NIREN NATH R/O 7 NO. PUB UDALI P.S. LANKA DIST. HAOJAI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. G BORAH, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER 13-03-2026 Heard Ms. G. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, for the State respondent. Page No.# 2/3 2. This is an application filed under Section 482 BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of pre-arrest bail to the accused/petitioner, namely, Shri Biren Nath who is apprehending arrest in connection with Lanka P.S. Case No. 267/2025 under Sections 329(4)/64(1)/351(2) of BNS, 2023. 3. Case diary received. Perused the same. 4. It is submitted by Ms. Borah, learned counsel that after obtaining the order interim pre-arrest bail, the petitioner appeared before the I.O. and cooperated with the investigation and his statement is also recorded. 5. She further submitted that the petitioner and the victim had a relationship and as there was disturbance in his family, he tried to get rid of the present victim and as the petitioner refused to continue with the relationship, the victim lodged the present FIR. 6. However, the petitioner is still ready and willing to extend his further cooperation in the further investigation of the case, if required, if he is provided with the privilege of pre-arrest bail. 7. Mr. Borthakur, learned APP submitted in this regard that she brought serious allegation against the present petitioner wherein it is alleged that the petitioner committed rape on her and on earlier occasion also he committed same kind of offence, wherein the matter was earlier compromised with the intervention of the elderly people of the society. Mr. Borthakur accordingly raised objection and submitted that it is not at all a fit case to extend the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. 8. Hearing the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and I have also perused the case diary and the statement made by the victim. 9. Considering the materials available in the case diary, the cooperation extended by the petitioner and other circumstances of the case, I find that custodial interrogation/detention of the petitioner may not be required for the purpose of Page No.# 3/3 investigation of the case and as such, I find it a fit case to extend the privilege of pre- arrest bail to the petitioner. 10. In view of this, the interim bail granted to the present petitioner vide order dated 08.01.2026 is hereby made absolute on the same terms and conditions. 11. With the above observation and direction, this pre-arrest bail application stands disposed of. 12. Return the case diary herewith. JUDGE Comparing Assistant