Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010098692025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1609/2025 SRI SUBON MURMU S/O - SRI SUPOL MURMU ALIAS SAFAL MURMU, R/O VILL.- CHEDAMARI PT - II, P.O.- KALIPUKHURI, P.S. AND DIST- KOKRAJHAR, BTAD, ASSAM, PIN-783369. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:SHRI HOPNA HASDA S/O- LATE BELA HASDA R/O- VILL- CHEDAMARI PT-I P.O. KALIPUKHURI P.S. AND DIST- KOKRAJHAR BTAD ASSAM PIN- 78336 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M U MAHMUD, MS. D BORA,MR S ISLAM,MR S H MAHMUD Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR D K BHATTACHARYYA, (AMICUS CURIAE, R- 2) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA ORDER Date : 19.06.2025 Page No.# 2/3 Heard Mr. M.U. Mahmud, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. M.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam and Mr. D.K. Bhattacharjee, learned Amicus Curiae for the respondent No.2. This is an application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 in respect of Special Case No.138/2024 under Section 376 DA of IPC, R/W Section 6 of POCSO Act, corresponding to Kokrajhar P.S. Case No.54/2024 under Section 376 DA of IPC, R/W Section 6 of POCSO Act pending in the Court of Special Judge, Kokrajhar. The informant has alleged that on the day of occurrence, the present petitioner and two other unnamed persons had sexually molested his 14 year old girl. The medical report available in the record shows that there were no signs of forcible sexual assault either internally or externally. The victim girl has already been examined in the trial Court. The petitioner has already spent 96 days in judicial custody. Mr. M.U. Mahmud, learned counsel has submitted that the period of detention already undergone by him should be taken as a ground for releasing him on bail. Mr. M,P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that non-existence of external or internal injury does not mean that the girl was not sexually molested by the petitioner. Mr. M.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has further submitted that the girl was only 14 years old. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides. The victim girl has already been examined in the trial Court. The informant has also been examined and discharged after cross-examination. The two vital witnesses have also been examined. This Court is of the opinion that at this stage, the period of detention already undergone by the petitioner in judicial custody deserves to be taken up as a ground for releasing him on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. The petitioner Sri Subon Murmu shall be released on bail of Rs.25,000/- with surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, Kokrajhar. The petitioner shall regularly appear before the trial Court on each and every date of hearing Page No.# 3/3 and if he fails to do so without showing sufficient reasons, the trial Court shall have the liberty to procure his attendance by due process of law. With the aforesaid direction, the bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant