Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010086382025 2025:GAU-AS:7515 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1267/2025 ATUL BORAH S/O LATE MOHENDRA MOHAN BORAH R/O TINGRAI P.S. DIGBOI DIST. TINSUKIA, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REP. BY THE LEARNED PP, ASSAM 2:SMTI JYOTIKA SONOWAL BORGOHAI W/O LATE DEBAJIT SONOWAL R/O TINGRAI BONGAI P.O. TINGRAI P.S. DIGBOI DIST. TINSUKIA ASSAM PIN-786171 MOBILE NO. 600124990 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N HASAN, MR. I K BURAGOHAIN,MR. A HASAN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. SURAJIT DAS, (AMICUS CURIAE, R-2) Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER Date : 09-06-2025 Heard learned counsel Mr. N. Hassan for the petitioner Atul Borah, who has filed this application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with prayer for bail as he is behind bars since 31.05.2024 in connection with POCSO Case No. 59/2024, pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge (POCSO), Tinsukia, corresponding to Digboi Police Station Case No. 73/2024 under Section 354(A)/376AB/511 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Section 10/18 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. 2. Heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. P. Borthakur for the respondent State and learned Amicus Curiae Mr. Surajit Das for the respondent No. 2. 3. The allegation against the petitioner is that he committed penetrative sexual assault on a 9 year old victim. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 and learned Additional Public Prosecutor, have raised serious objection stating that the victim is 9 years old and the petitioner is 55 years old. Four witnesses have already been examined and this case is at the fag end of the trial. Considering the conduct of the petitioner, he is not entitled to bail. 5. It has been submitted that the grounds of arrest have not been Page No.# 3/4 communicated to the petitioner in a manner which could be understood by the petitioner. The petitioner has relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in connection with Prabir Purkayastha Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) reported in (2024) 8 SCC 254 wherein it has been observed that :- “21. The right to be informed about the grounds of arrest flows from Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India and any infringement of this fundamental right would vitiate the process of arrest and remand. Mere fact that a charge sheet has been filed in the matter, would not validate the illegality and the unconstitutionality committed at the time of arresting the accused and the grant of initial police custody remand to the accused.” 6. I have considered the submissions at the bar with circumspection and I have also scrutinized the scanned copies of Trial Court Record. It is true that the case is at the fag end of trial but this Court cannot ignore the fact that the grounds of arrest have not been communicated to the petitioner in such a manner in which the petitioner could understand the grounds. 7. Annexure-6 is the arrest memo and Annexure-7 is the notice under Section 50A of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 8. It is further submitted that the grounds of arrest were also not clearly mentioned to the relatives of the petitioner. 9. I have considered the submissions at the bar and I have relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Prabir Purkayastha (supra) and the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vihaan Kumar Vs. State of Haryana reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 269 wherein it was held that the grounds of arrest have to be communicated to the petitioner’s relatives properly and in Page No.# 4/4 writing. 10. In the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vihaan Kumar (supra) and Prabir Purkayastha (supra) it appears that bail may be granted to the petitioner. 11. 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 the learned Trial Court under the conditions that :- (i) the petitioner shall cooperate with the remaining part of trial, (ii) the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior written permission till completion of trial and, (iii) the petitioner shall not exercise threats to the witnesses and the petitioner shall not jump the bail. 12. On breach of any of the bail conditions, the Court is at liberty to immediately cancel the bail granted to the petitioner. 13. In terms of the above observation, this Bail Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant