AB 1061/2011 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE H. BARUAH Heard Mrs. K.K. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. K. Munir, learned Addl. P.P for the State of Assam. The first informant is the wife of the petitioner No. 1, while petitioner No. 2 is the brother of the petitioner No. 1. It has been alleged in the first informa tion report that lodged by Miss. Ariful Nesa, wife of petitioner No. 1 that peti tioner No. 1 married her concealing his first and second marriage. The marriage was contracted on 4-11-2009 and thereafter she was taken from Mangaldoi unto his residence on 8-7-2010. It is further alleged in the First Information Report th at thereafter the petitioner No. 1 is mentally harassing her on account of her f ailure to provide dowry and seldom manhandled. It is also alleged that on 4-4-20 11 at about 9.30 the petitioner No. 1 driven out her from her matrimonial home a fter assault. The informant, therefore, finding no other alternative filed the F IR with the Officer-in-Charge of Azara police station and the same was registere d as Azara P.S Case No. 88 of 2011 under Section 498(A) IPC. The FIR was lodged on 5-4-2011. The petitioner No. 1, the husband and his brother, petitioner No. 2 being appreh ensive of arrest in connection with case as indicated above have approached this court by filing this application under Section 438 Cr. P.C seeking privilege of pre arrest bail to them. In support of this application Mrs. K.K. Choudhury has submitted that the first informant has brought false allegation against the petitioners. There was no dem and and nothing had been sought for at any point of time whatsoever from the fir st informant. The allegation of physical assault is also false and fabricated. M rs. Choudhury, therefore, prays this court to provide privilege of pre arrest ba il to the petitioners. The materials available in the case diary as well as in the record are carefully perused, wherefrom it appears that petitioner No. 1 by concealing his earlier m arriages became successful to marry the informant. The materials also indicate t hat the petitioner No. 1 seldom assaulted her on account of failure to satisfy h is demand. However, materials are wanting in respect of petitioner No. 2. Having taken care of the matters in its entirety and the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties as well as the materials available in the c ase diary, the interim bail provided earlier in respect of the petitioner No. 2 (Toimul Ali) is made absolute. However, the prayer for pre arrest bail in respec t of the Petition No. 1 stands rejected. Accordingly, the interim bail granted e arlier to the petitioner No. 1 is cancelled. Application stands disposed of.