Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010089472025 2025:GAU-AS:12392 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/988/2025 RAFIQ AHMED @ KALAM @ABUL KALAM AZAD S/O MD. KITAP ALI VILLAGE BAGHPARI, PS MANGOLDOI, DISTRICT DARRANG ASSAM, PIN-784125 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:SAHAR ALI S/O BADRUDDIN VILLAGE- BAGHPARI PS MANGOLDOI DISTRICT DARRANG ASSAM PIN-78412 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D SARMAH, B. D. KAKATI,S. J. SAHARIAH Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. SURAJIT DAS,AMICUS CURIAE, (R-2) BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA O R D E R Date : 11.09.2025. Heard Mr. S. J. Saharia, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Page No.# 2/3 Baishya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, for the State respondent and Mr. S. Das, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the informant/respondent No.2. This is an application under Section 482 BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of pre- arrest bail to the accused/petitioner, who is apprehending arrest in connection with Mangoldoi P.S. Case No. 43/2025, under Section 6 of the POCSO Act. The case diary is received. Perused the same. It is submitted by Mr. Saharia, learned counsel that the petitioner is innocent and a false and concocted case is lodged against him, only due to his refusal to marry the daughter of the informant, who was minor and not attainted the age of her marriage. However, he submitted that the accused/petitioner had love relation with the victim and he also supposed to marry her when she attain the age of majority. Mr. Saharia, the learned counsel further submitted that after obtaining the order of interim pre-arrest bail dated 11.08.2025, he appeared before the I.O., cooperated with the investigation and his statement also recorded by the I.O., under Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023. Further, he is willing to extend his cooperation in further investigation of the case, if he is granted with the privilege of pre-arrest bail. Mr. Baishya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted in this regard that there are sufficient incriminating materials available in the case diary, specially, in the statement made by the victim girl under Section 183 BNSS as well as one friend of her is also available in the case diary. Further Mr. Baishya submitted that at the relevant time of the incident, the victim was more than 17 years 08 months as per her birth certificate. Mr. Baishya also submitted that the accused Page No.# 3/3 is cooperating with the investigation of the case. Mr. Das, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the informant/respondent No.2 submitted in this regard that the statement made by the victim as well as the informant may be considered and considering the nature of the offence he raised objection and submits that it may not be a fit case to extend the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Hearing the submission of the learned counsel for both the sides and considering the materials available in the case diary vis-à-vis the conduct of the accused petitioner, I find that custodial interrogation may not be required for the purpose of interrogation. Accordingly, the order of interim pre-arrest bail dated 11.08.2025 is hereby made absolute on the same terms and conditions. The bail application stands disposed of. Return back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant