ORDER : MITALI THAKURIA, J. 1. Heard Mr. G.N. Sahewalla, the learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. N. Sahewalla, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard B. Sharma, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of State respondent and Mr. N.R. Sharma, the learned counsel appearing for the informant. 2. This is an application u/s 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita ( BNSS ), 2023 for granting pre-arrest bail to the accused petitioner for an FIR lodged by Janvi Agarwal (Informant) before the Officer-in-Charge, Hatigaon Police Station, Guwahati. 3. Case Diary is received. Perused the same. 4. It is submitted by Mr. Sahewalla that he subsequently obtained the certified copy of this FIR which has been annexed with the additional affidavit. Mr. Sahewalla, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is no ingredients at all in the FIR itself to attract Section 69 BNSS rather it is a case wherein both the petitioners and the victim were in a romantic relationship from the day of their marriage in the year 2023 and till 2025 they were living as husband and wife after their marriage in Ugratara Mandir. The only allegation against the petitioner is that he does not introduce the informant to his family members and thus is not a case to attract Section 69 BNSS which is alleged against the present petitioner, rather this is a case of quashing of the entire FIR. 5. Mr. Sharma, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted in this regard that the materials available in the Case Diary and the statement of the victim, it is seen that there is a false promise of marriage, they were in physical relationship and subsequently he avoided her when she pressurized to introduce herself with the petitioner’s family members. Further it is submitted that from the materials available in the CD it cannot be a case to grant him the privilege of pre-arrest bail. 6. Mr. Sharma, the learned counsel for the informant submitted that two ingredients which is required to fulfill Section 69 BNSS is available in the present case and the petitioner had the intention to deceive the informant from the very inception of their relationship and in false promise of marriage he had physical relationship with the victim. Further, Mr. 6. Mr. Sharma, the learned counsel for the informant submitted that two ingredients which is required to fulfill Section 69 BNSS is available in the present case and the petitioner had the intention to deceive the informant from the very inception of their relationship and in false promise of marriage he had physical relationship with the victim. Further, Mr. Sharma submitted that the case of divorce is still pending against the present petitioner and by suppressing the fact they entered into a physical relationship. Mr. Sharma accordingly submitted that his is not at all a fit case to grant the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the present petitioner at this stage. 7. Hearing the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides, I have also perused the Case Diary and considering the materials available in the Case Diary, it is seen that there is no allegation by the victim that she was not aware about the pendency of the divorce case of the present petitioner and that apart it is also seen that in the FIR itself it is stated that she was under impression that he will get divorce soon for which only they entered into marriage in Ugratara Mandir. 8. Considering all the aspects of the case, materials in the Case Diary, I find that custodial interrogation may not be necessary in this case. Accordingly, I find it a fit case to extent the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the present petitioner. 9. Accordingly, it is provided that in the event of arrest of the accused/petitioner, namely, Harsh Garodia in connection with FIR lodged by Janvi Agarwal (Informant) before the Officer-in-Charge, Hatigaon Police Station, Guwahati, he shall be enlarged on pre-arrest bail on his executing a bond of Rs. 9. Accordingly, it is provided that in the event of arrest of the accused/petitioner, namely, Harsh Garodia in connection with FIR lodged by Janvi Agarwal (Informant) before the Officer-in-Charge, Hatigaon Police Station, Guwahati, he shall be enlarged on pre-arrest bail on his executing a bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand)only each with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority, subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer within 7(seven) days; (ii) that the petitioner shall fully co-operate with the investigation of the case and shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required in connection with the investigation of the aforesaid P.S. case; and (iii) that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threaten or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. 10. The anticipatory bail application stands disposed of. 11. Send back the Case Diary.