Sri Suraj Kr Rai Vs the State of Assam — Anticipatory Bail | Gauhati HC (2026)

Sri Suraj Kr Rai Vs the State of Assam — Anticipatory Bail | Gauhati HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Pre-arrest (anticipatory) bail allowed: petitioner to appear before the Court of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (M), Titabar in connection with PRC Case No.37/2025 within 7 days and, on appearance, to be released on bail of Rs.25,000/- with a surety of like amount, subject to regularly appearing before the Trial Court on every date of hearing.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre-arrest (anticipatory) bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in respect of Titabar P.S. Case No.05/2025 registered under Sections 75/76/79 of BNS.

Court's answer

Under the given circumstances the petitioner does not deserve to be detained in custody for the allegation brought against him.

Ratio / Principle

The pre-arrest bail application of the petitioner is allowed.

Key takeaways

As a condition of the grant, the petitioner Suraj Kr. Rai is directed to appear before the Court of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (M), Titabar in connection with PRC Case No.37/2025 within next 7 (seven) days.ratio¶¶24
On his appearance, the petitioner Suraj Kr. Rai shall be released on bail of Rs.25,000/- with a surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Titabar.ratio¶¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail — Section 482, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Application in respect of Titabar P.S. Case No.05/2025 registered under Sections 75/76/79 of BNS, arising from an FIR alleging that on 09.01.2025 the petitioner offered an obscene proposal to a married woman and touched her private parts — Charge-sheet filed alleging sessions triable offences and summons issued — Petitioner had cooperated with the investigating officer during investigation — Held, under the given circumstances the petitioner does not deserve to be detained in custody — Pre-arrest bail application allowed, subject to the petitioner appearing before the Court of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (M), Titabar in connection with PRC Case No.37/2025 within seven days and furnishing bail of Rs.25,000/- with a surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Titabar — Further direction to regularly appear before the Trial Court on each date of hearing, failing which the Trial Court may procure his attendance per law. (Parthivjyoti Saikia, J.)

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010288452025

2026:GAU-AS:28

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

Case No. : AB/3049/2025

SRI SURAJ KR RAI

SON OF SRI SUBAHADUR RAI, RESIDENT OF BORHOLLA BEKAJAN, P.S. BORHOLLA, DISTRICT JORHAT, ASSAM, PRESENTLY SERVING AS A GRADE IV STAFF COOK IN 3RD APBN., TITABAR, P.S. TITABAR, DISTRICT JORHAT, ASSAM, PIN 785630.

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE P.P. ASSAM.

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S N TAMULI, MS. A BEGUM,MS P DEKA

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,

Page No.# 2/3

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA

ORDER

Date : 05.01.2026

1. Heard Mr. S. N. Tamuli, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Bhaskar Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.

2. This application has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in respect of Titabar P.S. Case No.05/2025, registered under Section 75/76/79 of BNS.

3. A married woman has alleged in the FIR that on 09.01.2025, at about 5 pm, the petitioner offered obscene proposal to her and also touched her private parts inside her room, she however managed to free herself and ran away from the spot.

4. The documents available in the record shows that the petitioner was cooperating with the investigating Officer at the time of investigation but he now apprehends that the Charge-Sheet has been filed alleging commission of sessions triable offences, the Court which issued summons to him to appear, would not allow him to go on bail because this Court does not have the jurisdiction to entertain his bail application.

5. I have considered the submission made by learned counsel for both the sides.

6. This Court is of the opinion that under the given circumstances the petitioner does not deserve to be detained in custody for the allegation brought against him.

7. The pre-arrest bail application of the petitioner is allowed accordingly.

Page No.# 3/3

8. It is hereby directed that the petitioner Suraj Kr. Rai shall appear before the Court of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (M), Titabar in connection with PRC Case No.37/2025 within next 7 (seven) days from today.

9. On his appearance, the petitioner, Suraj Kr. Rai shall be released on bail of Rs.25,000/- with a surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Titabar.

10. The petitioner is directed regularly appear before the Trial Court on each and every date of hearing and if he fails to do so, the Trial Court shall have the liberty to procure his attendance in accordance with the procedure as laid down by law.

11. With the aforesaid direction, the pre-arrest bail application is disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant