Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 6709 (GAU)

DIPANKAR DAS v. STATE OF ASSAM

AB/960/2026 · 2026-05-24

Parthivjyoti Saikia

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010091282026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/960/2026 DIPANKAR DAS S/OLATE JOGEN CHANDRA DAS VILL- KULHATI (AHATGURI) P.O. KULHATI, P.S. HAJO DIST. KAMRUP (R), ASSAM-781104. VERSUS STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : DR. D J DEKA, MR. S M MUNIR,MR. K MOHAMMED,MR D TALUKDAR,MR. S MUNIR Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA ORDER Date : 25.05.2026 Heard Mr. D. Talukdar, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. K. Mohammed, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam. This is an application filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for pre-arrest bail by the petitioner Dipankar Das, who apprehends arrest in connection with Hajo P.S. Case No. 0120/2026. A woman in her 40 (forty) years having a grown-up daughter developed relationship with the petitioner after the Page No.# 2/2 death of her husband. They lived together as husband and wife because he promised her to marry. It is alleged that the petitioner has taken a total amount of Rs.15 lakh from her on various occasions. Subsequently, the petitioner refused to marry her and threatened her with dire consequences. The case record shows that the petitioner has already purchased a plot of land from the informant woman. The Sale Deed is annexed with the records. The informant woman has narrated her case in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides. This Court is of the opinion that false promise of marry will not be applicable in this case. So far as taking away of money, the informant has other forums to recover the same. The allegations brought against the petitioner do not justify custodial integration of the petitioner and therefore, his prayer for pre-arrest bail is allowed. Accordingly, it is hereby directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner Dipankar Das in connection with Hajo P.S. Case No. 0120/2026, the arresting authority shall release him on bail of Rs.25,000/- with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority. The bail application is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant