Gauhati High Court

AB/2541/2026 of SRI MINTU RABHA Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM on 14 October 2026

2026:GAU-AS:15819

GAHC010218662026 2026:GAU-AS:15819 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2541/2026 SRI MINTU RABHA S/O KHANIN RABHA @ KHANINDRA RABHA, R/O HOUSE NO 38, RO VILL BIMOLA NAGAR, BISHNUPUR, PO GOPINATH NAGAR, PS BHARALUMUKH, DIST KAMRUP M,

GAHC010218662026

2026:GAU-AS:15819

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : AB/2541/2026

SRI MINTU RABHA

S/O KHANIN RABHA @ KHANINDRA RABHA, R/O HOUSE NO 38, RO VILL

BIMOLA NAGAR, BISHNUPUR, PO GOPINATH NAGAR, PS

BHARALUMUKH, DIST KAMRUP M, ASSAM, PIN 781016

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM

REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N J DUTTA, MR A BASUMATARY

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA

ORDER

Date : 15.10.2026

Heard Mr. N.J. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. This is an application filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for granting pre-arrest bail to the accused applicant namely, Sri Mintu Rabha, in

Page 1 of 3

connection with Noonmati P.S. Case No.172/2026, registered under Section 87 of the BNS, 2023. An FIR was lodged on 15.09.2026 by the informant before the Noonmati Police Station alleging that on 14.09.2026, the informant’s daughter went out of their residence to watch cultural programme with the informant’s son’s friend Safiqul Ali. However, since the daughter did not come back home, an FIR was lodged. On the basis of the FIR, police registered Noonmati P.S. Case No.172/2026 under the aforementioned Sections. The learned counsel for the accused applicant submits that the main accused Safiqul Ali has already been arrested and there is no allegation of any harassment or confinement against the accused applicant by the informant. He submits that in fact, the girl was taken to residence of one of the friend of the accused applicant and therefore, he is apprehending arrest. He submits that the accused applicant shall cooperate with the investigation and therefore, he should be granted pre-arrest bail. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed the pre-arrest bail. Case diary has been received and the same is perused. On consideration of the case diary, this Court is of the view that the accused applicant should be granted pre-arrest bail. Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest of the accused applicant named above, he shall be released on pre-arrest bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- with a surety of like nature to the satisfaction of the Arresting Authority in connection with the aforementioned case, subject to the

Page 2 of 3

following conditions:-

(i) the accused applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 10 days from today;

(ii) the accused applicant shall cooperate with the investigation and make himself available as and when called for;

(iii) the accused applicant shall not tamper or hamper with the investigation of the case, in whatsoever manner. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application stands disposed of.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Page 3 of 3

Loading citations and judicial treatment…

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead