Gauhati High Court
AB/2556/2026 of SRI SAGAR PANIKA Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM on 7 October 2026
GAHC010224842026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2556/2026 SRI SAGAR PANIKA S/O-LATE JAGARNATH PANIKA, R/O- CHARAIDEO CHAH BAGICHA, 9 NUMBER LINE, P.S- MATHURAPUR, DISTRICT-CHARAIDEO, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM
GAHC010224842026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/2556/2026
SRI SAGAR PANIKA
S/O-LATE JAGARNATH PANIKA,
R/O- CHARAIDEO CHAH BAGICHA, 9 NUMBER LINE, P.S- MATHURAPUR, DISTRICT-CHARAIDEO, ASSAM.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE P.P, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H P GUWALA, I KUMARI,MS. D SARMA,MR. A BORO
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Date : 08.10.2026
Heard Mr. HP Guwala, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. RJ Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. By this application, the petitioner has prayed for pre arrest bail in connection with Mathurapur P.S. Case No. 36/2025 registered under Sections 329/75(2)/76 of BNS, 2023. The FIR in connection with which the petitioner is apprehending arrest was lodged by the victim herself stating inter alia that when she was alone in her house, the petitioner entered her house in absence of her husband and outraged her modesty.
3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the story narrated in the ejahar is a concocted story and that the police upon investigation had however filed a charge sheet against the petitioner and the case is at the appearance stage.
4. Mr. RJ Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State however submits by placing the bail rejection order by the Court of Sessions Judge, Charaideo that there is no apprehension on the part of the petitioner.
5. Upon consideration of the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the parties, more so, in view of the fact that the petitioner is required to defend his case during the trial, this Court deems it fit to enlarge the petitioner on pre arrest bail on furnishing of bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of CJM, Charaideo under the following conditions:
i) the petitioner will appear before the Investigating Officer within 10 days from the date of the order.
ii) the petitioner will appear before the Investigating Officer thereafter as and when called for.
iii) the petitioner will not hamper, tamper with the evidence, neither influence the witnesses connected with the case.
iii) the petitioner will not leave the place of jurisdiction without the permission of the concerned Court.
6. Petition is disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant