Gauhati High Court
AB/910/2026 of PUSHPA BORA Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM on 22 June 2026
GAHC010085362026 2026:GAU-AS:9052 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/910/2026 PUSHPA BORA S/O - LATE DIMBESWAR BORA, RESIDENCE OF VILLAGE - NO. 2 KAKI DIFALU, P. - SANKARPUR, P.S. - KAKI, DISTRICT - HOJAI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF
GAHC010085362026
2026:GAU-AS:9052
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/910/2026
PUSHPA BORA
S/O - LATE DIMBESWAR BORA, RESIDENCE OF VILLAGE - NO. 2 KAKI
DIFALU, P. - SANKARPUR, P.S. - KAKI, DISTRICT - HOJAI, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. U DUTTA, B DUTTA
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MRS. K BARPUZARI(INFORMANT),Y N
MAHANTA(INFORMANT),DR. A CHAMUAH(INFORMANT)
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS
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 : 23.06.2026
Heard Mr. U. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and Mrs. K. Barpuzari, learned counsel for the respondent No.2/informant.
2. By this subsequent application filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 the petitioner, namely, Pushpa Bora, has prayed for pre-arrest bail in connection with Kaki P.S. Case No. 06/2026 under Section 61(2)/75/76/109(1) of BNS, 2023.
3. This is a subsequent bail petition as earlier bail petition was rejected by this Court on 01.04.2026 in AB/564/2026.
4. The case diary, was called for, has been received.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the meantime, the investigation might have progressed; that, the FIR was lodged with a days delay; that, except some torn clothes, no other materials were seized by the I/O, thereby throwing some doubts on the nature of the incident.
6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that there are no new grounds. It is submitted by the prosecution that there are statements of witnesses which have stated about seeing the informant running away from the house in crying state.
7. Upon perused the case diary, I find force in the said contention from the statements of two witnesses recorded before learned JMFC.
8. The learned counsel for the informant opposes the bail and submits that the nature of the alleged offence is not acceptable in society.
9. Upon perusing the materials and considering the matter, I am unable to find sufficient new grounds and that the investigation is still in progress. Accordingly, the bail petitioner has rejected at this stage.
10. Return back the case diary.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant