Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010115282026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1231/2026 RANA MAJUMDER AND 6 ORS. SON OF SHYAMOL MAJUMDER, RESIDENT OF LUMDING TOWN, P.O. AND P.S.-LUMDING,DIST- HOJAI, PIN-782447, ASSAM 2: RAJESH SARKAR SON OF PRADIP CH. SARKAR RESIDENT OF LUMDING TOWN P.O. AND P.S.-LUMDING DIST- HOJAI PIN-782447 ASSAM. 3: SUBHAJIT DUTTA SON OF DILIP DUTTA RESIDENT OF LUMDING TOWN P.O. AND P.S.-LUMDING DIST.HOJAI PIN-782447 ASSAM 4: RAHUL CHAKRABORTY SON OF DULAL CHAKRABORTY RESIDENT OF LUMDING TOWN P.O. AND P.S.-LUMDING DIST- HOJAI PIN-782447 ASSAM 5: BINEET MALAKAR SON OF PARITOSH MALAKAR RESIDENT OF LUMDING TOWN P.O. AND P.S.- LUMDING DIST- HOJAI PIN-782447 ASSAM Page No.# 2/5 6: ROHIT CHOUDHURY SON OF RABI CHOUDHURY RESIDENT OF LUMDING TOWN P.O. AND P.S.-LUMDING DIST- HOJAI PIN-782447 ASSAM 7: CHANDU DUTTA SON OF MUKUL DUTTA RESIDENT OF LUMDING TOWN P.O. AND P.S.-LUMDING DISTHOJAI PIN-782447 ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR A U AHMED, MS. H SARMA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS. S. CHANDA,MS A DAS,MR. S C BISWAS BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER Date : 15.07.2026 Heard Mr. M.K. Choudhury, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. A.U. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam and Mr. S.C. Biswas, learned counsel for the respondent No.2. 2. This is an application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 whereby the petitioners namely, 1. Rana Majumder, 2. Rajesh Sarkar, 3. Subhajit Dutta, 4. Page No.# 3/5 Rahul Chakraborty, 5. Bineet Malakar, 6. Rohit Choudhury and 7. Chandu Dutta are seeking Anticipatory Bail apprehending arrest in connection with an FIR, which is registered Lumding Police Case No. 79/2026 registered under Sections 140(3)/303(2)/117(4)/61(2) (a)/3(5)/Added Section 109(1)/140 (4) of BNS, 2023. 3. The brief fact of the case is that one Sri Arijit Das, lodged a FIR against the petitioners on 18-05-2026 stating that he is working as News Reporter at Prathom Khobor Correspondent and he had old enmity with Pappu (Brother of Seating MLA of Lumding LAC) and he was hiding from them. On 17/05/2026 at about 7:00 PM, he along with his friend Rakesh Dey were going to Anukul Thakur Mandir located at No.2 Santipara Nabapalli Road. First he talked with his friends Susmita Chokraborty and after she left the place suddenly about 15 to 16 people with their bikes and one four wheeler car came near him (the complainant didn't see the number plate of vehicles) and forcefully took him inside the four wheeler car and cover his face with cloths and the car started moving to unknown place and while running car, four people make him semi naked and tied his hand from behind and they took his Rs. 3000/- and his mobile phone and turn switch off his phone at near Bana Udsav Jungle. Later out of four, two persons he came to know and they were Suman Paul and Chandan Dutta. They took the complainant towards Barlangpher River and reaching nearby the river, they took him out from the car and made him sit nearby the car. Suddenly a group of people comprising of Ashim Baidya, Rajesh Sarkar, Rana Mazumdar, Subujit Dutta, Rahul Chakraborty, Binit Malakar, Rohit Choudhury and few others came with their bikes at the spot and started punching him and later Suman Dey took out Iron Rod which is used for lifting car and hit him on his head and he almost turned senseless. His hand was still Page No.# 4/5 tied behind. Later again they took him to the field of Bana Udsav Mandir Campus by walking and they took out their phone camera and started video recording on him and forced him to give false/wrong statement against Gautam Saha, Sujit Upadhya, Prodip Shill, Bijoy Dey, Montu, Sipra Roy and also against the seating MLA Shri Shiladitya Deb. They further told him that if he didn't give false statement than they will kill the complainant and out of fear, he gave the statement whatever they force him to say. Later suddenly they started running away one by one saying that The Police are arriving soon at the spot. But before leaving the place/spot, they threatened the complainant not lodge FIR regarding this incident or else they will kill him or destroy his life and his whole family. Later he came alone in semi naked condition and informed to his parent about the incidents from passerby Mobile and from half way, Police saw him and rescued him and took him to the Hospital. Animesh Misra is the main culprit behind his kidnapping. 4. Mr. M.K. Choudhury, learned Senior counsel submits that the petitioners were granted interim pre-arrest bail pursuant to that they had appeared before the Investigating Officer. Further it is submitted that the main accused of the case as named in the FIR i.e. one Animesh Misra has been granted bail by the learned Trial Court and therefore the present petitioners may also be considered for extending the same privileged. 5. Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam has placed the case diary for perusal of the Court. Mr. S.C. Biswas, learned counsel representing the respondent No.2/informant submits that the informant who is a journalist by profession has been continuously harassed by the local MLA and granting interim protection to the petitioners Page No.# 5/5 would result in causing of further harassment to the informant who has already been falsely implicated in two other POCSO cases. 6. Upon perusal of the case diary, it appears that, as submitted by the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner, the main accused of the case, Animesh Misra has been granted pre-arrest bail by the learned Court below. Further, a perusal of the Injury Report does not support the claim of the informant regarding serious injuries having been caused to him as a result of assault being made by the persons from the petitioner side. Furthermore, a perusal of the statement of the eye witness recorded under Section 183 of BNS before the Magistrate also does not support the version of the informant. 6. Having regard to the aforesaid materials I am of the view that the petitioners are entitled to the privilege of pre-arrest bail. Accordingly, the prayer for pre-arrest bail is allowed. 7. The order of interim pre-arrest bail dated 10.06.2026 is hereby made absolute on the same terms and conditions as may be applicable as of date. 8. The Anticipatory Bail petition, is accordingly stands disposed of. 9. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant