Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010017662026 2026:GAU-AS:9886 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/205/2026 MUKUNDA NATH S/O MAHENDRA NATH R/O VILL.- ATHUBHANGA, P.O.- BARUA PATHAR, P.S.- BOKO, DIST.- KAMRUP, ASSAM, PIN- 781136. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM. 2:BHANISMITA DEVI D/O KARTIK NATH VILL.- MOIRACHARA P.O. DAMALCHOS P.S.- BOKO DISTRICT- KAMRUP ASSAM PIN- 781135 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H DAS, D BARUAH Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Z DUTTA (FOR MOTHER OF R2),MR. A U CHOUDHURY (FOR MOTHER OF R2) BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER 20.07.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the Page No.# 2/3 State. None appears for respondent No. 2. 2. This is an application filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 and as amended up to date for granting the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the accused/petitioner in connection with Boko P.S. Case No. 23/2026 under Section 74/75(2)/64(2)/62/351(3) of the BNS, 2023 read with Section 10 of POCSO Act. 3. On 24.01.2026 one Bhanismita Devi lodged an ejahar before the Officer-in-Charge, Boko P.S. alleging on 21.01.2016 at about 11 A.M., the accused person petitioner met the Complainant in their village Path and on the pretext of teaching Math went into their house. After teaching Math for some time, he forcefully held her hand and attempted to touch her Chest outraging her modesty and tried to rape her. But as she shouted accused/petitioner released her and ran away from there and also threatened her that if she disclosed the incident to others, the accused/petitioner would take her life. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations against the petitioner are false and have been made because some tuition fees are due from the informant to the petitioner, who is the tutor of the victim. 5. Objection has been filed by the informant stating that the allegations made in the FIR are true and that there is no monetary transaction involved. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that pursuant to the interim protection granted by this Court, the petitioner has appeared before the IO. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the investigation of the case is now over and the charge sheet has been submitted. 7. Having regard to the above as well as the nature of the allegations, this Court is of the view that there may not be any necessity of taking the petitioner into custody during the trial. Page No.# 3/3 8. Accordingly, the prayer for pre-arrest bail is allowed. The interim pre-arrest bail granted vide order dated 04.02.2026 is hereby made absolute, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall not try to contact the victim or the informant, or try to influence or intimidate them in any manner. 9. Petition stands allowed accordingly. JUDGE Comparing Assistant