Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010103362026 2026:GAU-AS:8206 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1118/2026 SRI JIBON CHANDRA PODDAR ALIAS JEVAAN CH PODDAR AND ANR S/O- LATE NARENDRA NATH PODDAR R/O- ABHAYAPURI TOWN COMMITTEE M.G ROAD ABAHYAPURI, WARD NO. 4 P.S- ABHAYAPURI, DISTRICT- BONGAIGAON, ASSAM-783384 2: SMT NANDA PODDAR W/O-SRI JEVAAN CHANDRA PODDAR R/O- ABHAYAPURI TOWN COMMITTEE M.G ROAD ABAHYAPURI WARD NO. 4 P.S- ABHAYAPURI DISTRICT- BONGAIGAON ASSAM-78338 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P DAS, MS N BARUAH,MR A SARMA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER 10-06-2026 Heard Mr. P. Das, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. S. H. Borah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam. Page No.# 2/4 2. This is an application under Section 482 BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of pre- arrest bail to the accused/petitioners, namely, (i) Sri Jibon Chandra Poddar @ Jevaan Ch. Poddar and (ii) Smt. Nanda Poddar who are apprehending arrest in connection with PRC Case No. 750/2026 under Section 306 IPC, read with Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 corresponding to Jalukbari P.S. Case No. 736/2022. 3. Scanned copy of the TCR has already been received. Perused the same. 4. It is submitted by Mr. Das, that these two petitioners are no way connected with the alleged offence and they are the in-laws of the victim, who resides at Abhayapuri and the victim/deceased as well as her husband, i.e., the accused petitioner No.1 used to reside in a rented premises at Guwahati and thus, they are not at all connected with the alleged offence as described in the FIR. 5. However, after coming to know about the same, they earlier approached this Court with a prayer for pre-arrest bail in AB No. 68/2023, which was rejected by this Court and thereafter, charge sheet has been filed showing the present petitioners as absconder. The petitioners have already received notice from the learned Trial Court and they are still ready to appear before the learned Trial Court and to contest the case, if they are provided with some interim protection. 6. He further submitted that the case is Sessions Triable in nature, wherein charge sheet has already been filed against all the petitioners under Section 306 IPC read with Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 7. After rejection of the earlier pre arrest bail application, this present pre arrest bail application has been filed by the present petitioners. However, they are still ready and willing to appear before the learned Trial Court, on each and every date to be fixed by the Court. 8. He further submitted that after rejection of the earlier bail application, police never searched for them and hence, they could not cooperate with the I.O. Mr. Das Page No.# 3/4 accordingly submitted that this is a fit case, wherein interim pre-arrest bail can be provided to both the petitioners. 9. Ms. Borah, learned APP raised objection and submitted that this is case serious in nature, wherein charge sheet has been laid against the present petitioners under Section 306 IPC read with Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 10. She further submitted that from the materials available in the case record, it is seen that not only the accused No.1 is involved in the alleged crime, but these two petitioners are also equally involved in the alleged offence and in the suicide note also the victim uttered the name of these two petitioners. She accordingly raised objection and submitted that it is not at all a fit case to grant pre-arrest bail to the present petitioners. However, they can appear before the learned Trial Court below with an appropriate application seeking regular bail, which may be considered in accordance with law. 11. Heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and I have also perused the scanned copy of the TCR. 12. It is a fact that on earlier occasion also these two petitioners approached this Court in AB No. 68/2023 and the Court vide order dated 03.04.2023 rejected such prayer of the petitioners. But from the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is seen that after the rejection of their earlier pre-arrest bail application, they were never searched by police during investigation and hence, the petitioner approached this Court with a prayer for pre-arrest bail, but subsequently they did not cooperate in the investigation of the case. 13. So considering the entire fact and circumstances of this and the nature of the offence, this Court is of the opinion that some interim protection may be provided to the petitioners till the case is committed before the Court of learned Sessions Judge by the Court of learned CJM. 14. Accordingly, it is provided that in the event of arrest of the accused/petitioners, Page No.# 4/4 namely, (i) Sri Jibon Chandra Poddar @ Jevaan Ch. Poddar and (ii) Smt. Nanda Poddar in connection with PRC Case No. 750/2026 under Section 306 IPC, read with Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 corresponding to Jalukbari P.S. Case No. 736/2022, they shall be enlarged on interim pre-arrest bail on their executing a bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each only with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. 15. Accordingly, no coercive action shall be taken against the present petitioners, till the case is committed before the Court of learned Sessions Judge by the learned CJM. 16. Further, the learned CJM is hereby directed commit the case record before the Court of learned Sessions Judge preferably within a period of 15 (fifteen) days from the date of order. 17. With the above observation and directions, this pre-arrest bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant