Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010111862026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1212/2026 SALIMUDDIN S/O- LT. KHABURUDDIN, R/O VILL P.O.- TUKRAPARA, P.S- GOROIMARI, DISTRICT KAMRUP, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M I HUSSAIN, R KHA,N. UDDIN,MS. P AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 08.06.2026 Heard Mr M I Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr K Baishya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. 2. By this application, the petitioner has prayed for pre-arrest bail in Page No.# 2/3 connection with Goroimari PS Case No. 49/2025, registered under Sections 142/308/117(2)/ 351(2)/3(5) of BNS. 3. The FIR lodged on 05.06.2025, reveals that the husband of the informant was kidnapped by the accused persons named in the said FIR, however, only one accused person was named and others were identified and they were not named as such. It was further stated that her husband informed her over telephone that the accused persons had assaulted him and has demanded Rs. 3 lacs, along with a threatening that if he does not pay he will be killed. The informant further stated that after knowing about the incident, she arrived at the Police Station and went to the place of occurrence and recovered her husband. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the actual fact was not stated in the FIR, inasmuch, as the informant’s husband had taken Rs. 3 lacs from the petitioner for the purpose of purchasing a vehicle with the promise to return back the money within a period of one month, but the husband of the informant had not repaid the money back and that on the said date, i.e., on 05.06.2025, the husband of the informant was caught with an intention to hand him over to the Police and with the interference of the local people, the matter was amicably settled and when the informant and the Police reached, the husband was taken to the Police Station. As such, he submits that there was no incident of kidnapping or threatening. 5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, however, submits that the real fact would be revealed from the Case Diary and as such, has prayed for calling of the same. Page No.# 3/3 6. On consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the FIR, it is seen that when the wife of the informant went to the place, where she was called by her husband, she recovered her husband. No untoward incident or any serious occurrence was stated in the said FIR, while recovering her husband. As such, this Court finds it fit to release the petitioner on pre-arrest bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-, with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority, on the following conditions:- i) He will appear before the Investigating Officer, as and when called for. ii) He will not leave the State of Assam, without the permission of the arresting authority. (iii) He will appear before the Investigating Officer within a period of 10 days from the date of this order. 7. Bail Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant