AB 2054/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. BARUAH Heard Mr. P. Sarma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as Mr. K. Munir, learned P.P. appearing for the State of Assam. These petitioners on account of registration of Sootea P.S. Case No.65/1 1 on the basis of the first information lodged by Miss Rusma Begum apprehending their arrest file this petition under Section 438 CrPC praying privilege of pre- arrest bail. Mr. Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioners in support of the petit ion contends that the first information has been lodged with the police on accou nt of deprivation of share in property belonging to the petitioner No.1, Ajuli B egum. It is also submitted by him that there was an amicable settlement for dist ribution of the property among the petitioner No.1 and others. The allegations b rought in the first information report in regard to assault are all false and fa bricated. In view of the submissions of Mr. Goswami, we have meticulously perused the materials on record as well as the case diary. The materials abundantly spea k of a dispute between the first informant and the petitioner in respect of the property. Taking all these facts in its entirety, this Court finds it a fit case w here privilege of pre-arrest bail can be provided. Accordingly, interim order pr ovided on 12.7.2011 is made absolute.