Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010100122024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/467/2024 HABI RAHMAN @ HABIBAR RAHMAN S/O LATE MOFIJAL ALI @ MOHIJAL ALI, R/O BHELAKOBA PART- II, P.S.- BAGRIBARI, DIST.- KOKRAJHAR (ASSAM). VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. TO BE REP. BY THE P.P., ASSAM. 2:MONIR UDDIN AHMED S/O LATE NASIM UDDIN R/O BHELAKOBA PART- II P.S.- BAGRIBARI DIST.- KOKRAJHAR (ASSAM) PIN- 783337 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H R A CHOUDHURY, MR. A AHMED,MR. I U CHOWDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR A TEWARI, AMICUS CURIAE R2 Linked Case : Crl.A./156/2024 HABI RAHMAN @ HABIBAR RAHMAN S/O LATE MOFIJAL ALI @ MOHIJAL ALI R/O BHELAKOBA PART- II P.S.- BAGRIBARI Page No.# 2/3 DIST.- KOKRAJHAR (ASSAM). VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. TO BE REP. BY THE P.P. ASSAM. 2:MONIR UDDIN AHMED S/O LATE NASIM UDDIN R/O BHELAKOBA PART- II P.S.- BAGRIBARI DIST.- KOKRAJHAR (ASSAM) PIN- 783337. ------------ Advocate for : MR H R A CHOUDHURY Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date :05/08/2026 (Michael Zothankhuma, J) 1. Heard Mr. I.U. Choudhury, learned counsel for the applicant/appellant. Also heard Mr. R.R. Kaushik, learned APP, Assam and Mr. A.Tiwari, learned Amicus Curiae, appearing for the respondent no. 2. 2. This is an application under Section 389 Cr.P.C. seeking suspension of the execution of sentence passed against the applicant pursuant to the impugned judgement dated 30/03/2024 passed by the Court of the learned Special Judge, Kokrajhar, in Special Case No. 51/2018, by which the applicant/appellant has been convicted under Section 6 of the POCSO Act for having committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault on a 11 year old girl. 3. The main thrust of the submission of the applicant’s counsel is that the FIR Page No.# 3/3 had been lodged 9 days after the incident. Further, the victim, the grandmother of the victim and cousin could not recall the exact date when the when rape had occurred. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that no clothes of the victim had been seized and the entire case rests solely on the evidence of the victim and the interested witnesses. 4. Mr. R.R. Kaushik, learned APP, Assam and Mr. A.Tiwari, learned Amicus Curiae, appearing for the respondent no. 2, submit that the FIR had been filed in the year 2018 and the evidence of the witnesses had been taken 4 years later. As such, it would have been difficult for an 11 year old girl and the witnesses to remember the exact date of the incident, after 4 years of the incident. Further, PWs- 4 & 7 had seen the appellant taking the victim girl to his house. Further, the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. corroborated the testimony of the victim. 5. We have heard the learned counsels for the parties. 6. On considering the submissions made by the counsels for the parties and keeping in view that the final hearing of this case has been fixed on 08/09/2026, we are not inclined to allow the present application at this stage. 7. The application is accordingly rejected. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant