AB 20/2011 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE I A ANSARI This is an application made under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking pre-arrest bail fo r the petitioner, namely, Sri Mohan Ch. Das, in connection with Nalbari Police S tation Case No. 422/2010, under Section 304(B) of the IPC. Heard Mr. T. Deori, learned counsel, who had appeared in this case as the counse l for the petitioner, seeking to withdraw from this case on the ground that the brief of this case has been taken back by the petitioner from him and Mr. J. Rab ha, learned counsel, who had filed this bail application. Heard also Mrs. K. K. Choudhury, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, and Mrs. A. Begum, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the State re spondents. Perused the above application and materials on record. The petitioner’s earlier application for pre-arrest bail was rejected by order, dated 29.11.2010, on perusal of the case diary. The order, dated 29.11.2010, af orementioned reveals that the rejection of the petitioner was on the ground that the case diary revealed cogent and incriminating materials against the petition er. In the backdrop of the above facts, the petitioner has, now, made this applicati on supported by an affidavit, which has been filed by the complainant-informant of the case, to the effect that the complainant-informant had filed the case aga inst the petitioner due to some misunderstanding. From the events, as indicated above, it transpires that the petitioner has conta cted the complainant-informant and it is under the influence of the petitioner t hat the complainant-informant has filed the affidavit. The conduct of the petit ioner further disqualifies him from seeking any direction for pre-arrest bail in asmuch as there is clear attempt by him to influence the course of effective inv estigation of the case. Because of the reasons discussed above, this Court is of the firm view that the in the facts and attending circumstances of the present case, the petitioner can not be given the benefit of pre-arrest bail. Situated thus and in the interest of justice, the petitioner’s prayer for pre-ar rest bail is hereby rejected.