AB 2882/2011 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.BARUAH Heard Mr. U. Rabha, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also he ard Mr. B. B. Gogoi, learned Addl. P.P. for the State respondents assisted by Mr . A. Choudhury, learned counsel. The petitioner is a school teacher of the Roha M.E. Girls School , district Barpeta. He filed this petition under Section 438 CrPC apprehending a rrest in connection with P.S. Case No. 758/2011 corresponding to GR Case No. 155 2/11 to provide him the privilege of pre-arrest bail in view of the grounds cont ended in the petition. The aforesaid case came to be registered on the basis of an info rmation lodged in writing by one Renuka Das, headmistress of the school, as indi cated above, on 19.7.2011 with the Officer-Incharge of Howly Police Station agai nst the petitioner and three other persons namely Ramendra Borah, Jitu Choudhury & Jayanta Kalita. In the FIR, it has been alleged that an illegal demand was ma de to her by one J. Choudhury and Nabajit to whom she promised to pay Rs. 20,000 /-. On 18.7.2011 while another demand was made by one J. Choudhury over phone, s he apprised the matter to the managing committee of the school which advised her to take the help of the police. Such demand was orally informed to the police a nd the police obtained signature on a 500/- Rupee note of a Magistrate namely P. Choudhury and instructed to handover the same to the persons demanding money an d accordingly a trap was laid and the culprits were arrested. Such persons arres ted during trap are Ramendra Borah, Jitu Choudhury & Jayanta Kalita. The FIR hav ing contained the name of the petitioner herein, apprehending his arrest in conn ection with this case, filed this petition. It is submitted by Mr. Raha, learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is never involved himself in the demand of money from the headmistre ss of the school and she filed the information in writing with the police in ord er to harass the petitioner. In view of the facts appearing on the face of the record, it is submitte d by Mr. Rabha, the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is en titled to pre-arrest bail. Mr. B.B. Gogoi, learned P.P. while resisting the petition, places befor e the Court the materials collected so far as against the petitioner by the I/O. During investigation of the case, the materials so far collected by the I/O having been scrutinized, I find that the petitioner is stated to be the ring leader of the episode in respect of demanding money from the headmistress. In view of the materials available in the case diary as against the peti tioner, it is submitted by Mr. Gogoi, the learned Addl. P.P. that the petitioner is not entitled to have the privilege, as sought for. The involvement of the petitioner appears from the statement of a co-acc used. The co-accused while giving his statement before the Investigating Officer stated that the petitioner herein is the ring leader of the entire episode of d emanding money from the headmistress. Except the statement of the co-accused, th e Investigating Officer is unable to collect further material showing complicity of the petitioner in demanding money from the headmistress. Taking note of all these facts in its entirety, the petitioner is provid ed interim bail till 14th of November, 2011 which reads as under. In the event of arrest of the petitioner in connection with the case a s referred to above, he shall be released on bail for Rs. 10,000/- with a surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority. Within the time frame, the petitioner shall approach the court below for regular bail. It is made clear that this interim bail will remain in force till 14th of November, 2011. With this order, this petition stands disposed of.