Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010070632026 2026:GAU-AS:6636 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/757/2026 ADHIR DAS AND 2 ORS S/O DWIJEN DAS, R/O WARD NO 9, SONPUR, NALBARI, P.S. NALBARI, DIST. NALBARI, ASSAM. 2: DHANTI DAS SON OF RANJIT DAS RESIDENT OF WARD NO. 9 SONPUR NALBARI P.S. NALBARI DIST. NALBARI ASSAM 3: HIMANGSHU DEKA S/O LT. KANAK DEKA RESIDENT OF PAILA DIGHELI NALBARI P.S. NALBARI DIST.NALBARI ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P DAS, MS N BARUAH,MR K J PATHAK Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER 14/05/2026 Heard Mr. P Das, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. B Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam, appearing for the State respondents. 2. This is an application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, praying for grant of pre-arrest bail to the accused petitioners, namely, (1) Adhir Das, (2) Dhanti Das and (3) Himangshu Deka, who are apprehending arrest in connection with Nalbari P.S. Case No. 328/2025 registered under Sections 126(2)/118(2)/109/3(5) of BNS, 2023. 3. Case diary is received and perused the same. 4. It is submitted by Mr. Das, learned counsel for the petitioners that after obtaining the order of interim pre-arrest bail, the accused petitioners appeared before the Investigating Officer on 13.04.2026, but on that day, their statements were not recorded and as per direction of the Investigating Officer, they again appeared before the Investigating Officer on 30.04.2026 and their statements got recorded by the Investigating Officer. However, the accused petitioners are still ready and willing to extend their cooperation in further investigation of the case, if they are granted with the privilege of pre-arrest bail. 5. Mr. Das, learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that during the period of incident, there was Rash Mela in Nalbari District, wherein, these two petitioners were assaulted by some public on the allegation of chain Page No.# 3/4 snatching, but as the petitioners were also present there, who were known to them, the mother of the victim lodged an FIR against the present petitioners. He further submitted that earlier the wife of the accused petitioner No. 1 lodged an FIR against the victim, alleging assault and grievious injuries on him in the year 2023. Thus, with the previous grudge only, the present FIR was lodged against the petitioners. 6. Mr. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam submitted that from the statement made by the victim as well as some of the witnesses, it is seen that these are the persons, who assaulted the victim, causing grievious injuries on his person, who was accordingly admitted in the hospital. However, it is submitted that as per the medical report, the injuries sustained by the victim was simple and caused by blunt object, but the photographs annexed to the case diary shows that there are sharp cut injury sustained by the victim. However, it is submitted by Mr. Sarma, that both the petitioners appeared before the Investigating Officer, co-operated with the investigation and their statements have already been recorded. 7. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the medical report vis-à-vis the other materials available in the case diary, this Court is of the opinion that custodial interrogation may not be necessary for the purpose of investigation. 8. In view of the above, it is held that the accused petitioners are entitled for the privilege of pre-arrest bail and accordingly, the order of interim pre-arrest bail dated 07.04.2026 is hereby made absolute on the same terms and conditions. Page No.# 4/4 9. With the above observations, the present anticipatory bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant