AB 1149/2011 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE H. BARUAH Heard Mr. K. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. K. Munir, learn ed Addl. P.P for the State of Assam. Informant, Sri Sunil Sutradhar is the father of Jodu Sutradhar, aged about 16 ye ars who accompanied the petitioner No. 1 to else where to earn more money. Infor mant’s son was brought from his house after paying Rs. 1000/- as advance to the informant. After two months both the petitioners came together and paid another Rs. 1,000/- to the mother(Jomuna Das) of Jadu Sutradhar. But, thereafter when hi s son was not returning home, though approached the petitioners time and again t o have the actual address of his son they refused to provide the same and ultima tely they threatened the first informant with dire consequence. Being aggrieved, he lodged this FIR on the basis of which Barpeta P.S Case No. 1 404 of 2010 under Section 364/367/370 was registered. It is submitted by Mr. Bhuyan in support of the application that Jodu Sutradhar, the victim returned home, but the petitioners do not have any information wheth er he has arrived at or not. From the facts appearing in the face of the record, the FIR in particular it appears that both the petitioners were the persons who had taken the Jodu Sutradhar for earning money somewhere must have the informat ion whereabout of Jadu Sutradhar. A reasonable apprehension being crept in, in t he mind of the first informant, the father, the first information was lodged. Now, the petitioners, namely, Sri Dipak Das and Sri Dilip Das being apprehensive of their arrest in connection with the aforesaid case have approached this cour t for grant of pre arrest bail to them. We have carefully perused the materials on record as well as the Case Diary. The availability of the materials in the Case Diary will not justify grant of pre a rrest bail to the petitioners. Application accordingly stands rejected A.B stands disposed of.