JUDGMENT 1. Heard Mr. N. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. 2. By this application under Section 438, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) the petitioner namely, Mrs. Parbin Baby has prayed for pre-arrest bail, apprehending her arrest, in connection with Hajo Police Station Case No. 575/2015, registered under Sections 120B/302, Indian Penal Code. 3. In the FIR lodged on 06.11.2015, the informant had mentioned that his elder brother, Tabibur Rahman @ Mojahar had remained un-traced after coming out of his office of the Life Insurance Corporation of India at Hojai in the evening hours of 05.11.2015. It was on 06.11.2015, at about 4-00 p.m., the dead body of Tabibur Rahman @ Mojahar (the deceased) was found near a river with injuries on various parts of the body. The present petitioner is the wife of the deceased. After causing investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted a part charge sheet being Charge Sheet No. 456/2017 on 29.11.2017 against 3 (three) accused persons viz. (1) Azad Ali, (2) Jiaur Rahman & (3) Sri Gopal Das. Subsequent to the submission of the part charge sheet, the petitioner was called to appear before the I.O. and on being so called, the petitioner had appeared before the I.O. On her such appearance, the statement of the petitioner has been recorded by the I.O. of the case and upon perusal of some of the statements available in the case diary the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that some of the relatives of the deceased had expressed doubts regarding the involvement of the petitioner in the case of the death of the deceased but no specific evidence, as on date, has been unearthed about any kind of conspiracy of the petitioner with the already charge sheeted accused persons. 4. In view of the facts that have emerged from the materials collected during the course of investigation so far, as available in the case diary so produced, this Court is of the considered view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner at this stage the investigation of the petitioner is not necessary since she has already joined in the investigation and provided she extends her cooperation in the further investigation of the case and the course of investigation is not likely be prejudicially affected if such privilege is extended to the petitioner. 5. 5. Accordingly, the earlier interim protection of pre-arrest bail granted to the petitioner by the order dated 03.01.2020 is hereby made absolute, subject to the conditions :- (1) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer of the case within 15 (fifteen) days from today and shall, thereafter, appear as and when her presence is required for the cause of investigation and she shall continue to cooperate with the investigation; (2) The petitioner shall not hamper with the investigation, or tamper with the evidence of the case; & (3) The petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or premise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer. 6. The bail application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.