Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010074992025 2025:GAU-AS:6304 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1085/2025 ROFIQUL HOQUE BEPARI @ RASHIDUL HOQUE BEPARI S/O. MOHINUR HOQUE @ MOYNUL HOQUE BEPARI, R/O. VILL.- POKALAGI PT. II, P/S. GOLAKGANJ, DIST. DHUBRI, PIN-783334, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP ASSAM 2:BHARATI BARMAN W/O. MONORANJAN BARMAN R/O. VILL.- POKALAGI PT-II P/S. GOLAKGANJ DHUBRI ASSAM-783334 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR SARFRAZ NAWAZ, SAMIM RAHMAN,MR. SURAJIT DAS,A W AMAN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS. R CHOUDHURY (Amicus Curiae, R-2) BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER Date : 20-05-2025 Heard Mr. S. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner Rofiqul Hoque Bepari Page No.# 2/3 @ Rashidul Hoque Bepari, who has filed this application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with prayer for bail as he is behind bars since 13.02.2025 in connection with Special Case No. 66/2025 arising out of Goalkanj Police Station Case No. 38/2025 registered under Sections 64, 62 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Section 8 of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. 2. Heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam and learned Amicus Curiae Ms. R. Choudhury for respondent No. 2. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has been behind bars for 96 (Nine Six) days. The petitioner is only 27 (Twenty Seven) years old and a false case has been brought up against the petitioner who had a love affair with the victim. It is submitted that when the petitioner refused to marry the victim, she has falsely alleged him of committing sexual assault on her. The petitioner has further prayed for bail as he was not communicated with the grounds of arrest in a manner understood by him. His family members were also not communicated the grounds of arrest in a manner understood by them. 4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has raised serious objection stating that the petitioner is not entitled to bail considering the gravity of offence. The statement of the victim under Section 180/183 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has not yet been recorded. Learned Amicus Curiae for the respondent No. 2 Ms. R. Choudhury has stated that trial would be adversely affected as the FIR itself reveals that the petitioner has threatened the victim. 5. I have considered the submissions at the bar with circumspection. I have Page No.# 3/3 also scrutinized the scanned copies of Trial Court Records. 6. Indeed the grounds of arrest have not been communicated to the petitioner and his family in a manner understood by them. 7. It appears that bail may be granted to the petitioner. 8. Considering all aspects, petition is allowed. The petitioner is enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with a suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court under the conditions that :- (i) the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission till completion of trial and, (ii) the petitioner shall not exercise threats to the victim or to any of the witnesses. 9. On breach of any of the bail conditions, the Court is at liberty to immediately cancel the bail granted to the petitioner. 10. In terms of the above observation, this Bail Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant