AB 2858/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.R. SARMA Heard Mr. B. Choudhury, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. B .S. Sinha, learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State of Assam. Also heard Mr. K. Hussain, learned counsel appearing for the informant. The allegation made in the FIR against the petitioners are that the petitioner N o. 1 Md. Sahajamal entered the house of the informant, who is a minor and rappe d her, as a result of which she become pregnant .. In her statement, recorded u/ s. 164 Cr.P.C,. the victim girl clearly stated that her age was 16 years and tha t the petitioner, by showing a dagger had stopped her from raising any alarm. The allegations, made against the other two petitioners i.e. petitioner No. 2 and 3 is that they being the brothers of the petitioner No. 1 asked the informan t to compromise the matter by taking an amount of Rs. 15,000/- and get her pregn ancy aborted. In view of the above, considering the entire aspect of the matter, I find no suf ficient reason requiring custodial detention for interrogation of the petitioner s Nos. 2 and 3, namely, Md. Samsul Haque and Md. SAhabuddin Sk. Therefore, inter im bail dated 14.9.2011, granted in favour of the said two petitioners, are made absolute. However, considering the entire aspect of the matter and the involvem ent of the petitioner No. 1 named above, I find no sufficient reason to extend t he benefit of pre-arrest bail in favour of the said petitioner. Accordingly the prayer for pre-arrest bail made on behalf of the petitioner No. 1 is rejected. C onsequently, the interim bail granted in favour of Md. Sahajamal on 14.9.2011 sh all stand vacated. With the above observation, this bail application is disposed of. Return the C.D.