Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010094022025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1436/2025 JAKIR DEWAN S/O MD. HASEN DEWAN R/O VILL-TUNIJAN TEA ESTATE, LOKAMPUR,P.S.LALUK DIST. LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:JOSEPH SAWASHI S/O LATE PROBUDHAN SAWASHI R/O VILL-46 NO. TUNIJAN BAGAN P.S. LALUK DIST. LAKHIMPUR ASSAM PIN-78416 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A CHAUDHURY, MR. D BORA,MR. N MAHAJAN,MR. P K DAS Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR SARFRAZ NAWAZ (AMICUS CURIAE R2) Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 29.07.2025 1. Heard Mr. D. Bora, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, 1. Md. Jakir Dewan, who has been detained behind the bars since 05.11.2024 (for last 260 days) in connection with Special POCSO Case No.140/2024 arising out of Laluk P.S Case No. 177/2024 under Sections 140(3)/70(2) of BNS, 2023, R/W Section 6 of POCSO Act, 2012. 3. The gist of the accusation in this case is that on 15.10.2024, the father of the victim girl had lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-Charge, Laluk P.S, inter alia, alleging that on 12.10.2024, the present petitioner took the daughter of the informant in his vehicle for showing cinema at Bagan field, instead of taking her there, he took her to some other place and committed rape on her with other person. The victim returned back home on 14.10.2024. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is languishing behind the bars for last 260 days and in the meanwhile, the victim girl as well as the informant has already been examined by the trial court. Page No.# 3/5 5. He also submits that the petitioner is also pressing this bail on the ground that at the time of his arrest, though notice u/s 47 of BNSS was served on him, it did not contained any grounds of arrest. 6. He further submits that in order to defend himself properly, the petitioner is required to be released on bail considering his long period of detention. 7. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner at this stage on the ground that there are sufficient incriminating materials against the petitioner on record and the victim girl has categorically implicated the petitioner in the offence alleged in this case. 8. He also submits that the doctor who examined the victim girl is yet to be examined and if the petitioner is released on bail, the said witness may be influenced. 9. Mr. S. Nawaz, the learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the respondent no.2 has also opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner on the ground that there are sufficient incriminating materials against the petitioner in the records as the victim has categorically implicated him in the offence alleged in this case. 10. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides and have gone through the scanned copy of the records of Special POCSO Case No.140/2024. 11. Apart from the fact that the notice furnished to the petitioner u/s 47 of BNSS at the time of his arrest did not contain the Page No.# 4/5 grounds which necessitate his arrest in the aforesaid case. One another relevant fact which dealt in favour of the petitioner is that the victim girl as well as the informant have already been examined and no minor witness is there to be examined. 12. All the remaining witnesses are adult person. The apprehension of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State that doctor who is important witness for the prosecution may be influenced does not have any basis. 13. Therefore, in view of the above considering facts as well as the period of detention undergone by the petitioner (260 days), the petitioner is allowed to go on bail of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) only with one surety of like amount subject to the satisfaction of the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge cum Special Judge (POCSO), Lakhimpur with following conditions - (i) That the petitioner shall co-operate in the trial of Special POCSO Case No.140/2024, which is pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge cum Special Judge (POCSO), Lakhimpur. (ii) That the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person who may be acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts of the case before the Investigating Officer; Page No.# 5/5 (iii) That the petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court as and when so required by the Trial Court; (iv) That the petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail. 14. Accordingly, this bail application is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant