Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010111932025
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1783/2025 BISHNU KAHAR S/O BIKRAM KAHAR R/O RAJMAI PAKHIMURI P.S. DEMOW DIST. SIVASAGAR, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR TO BE REP.BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:SMTI TULSHI BHUYAN D/O MINTU MUNDA R/O RAJMAI PAKHIMURI 10 NO. WARD P.S. DEMOW DIST. SIVASAGAR ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A AHMED, U U KHAN,MR. M A CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR SARFRAZ NAWAZ (AMICUS CURIAE, R2)
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 25.07.2025
1. Heard Mr. A. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State as well as Mr. S. Nawaz,
Page No.# 2/3 learned Amicus Curiae for the respondent No. 2. 2. This application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Bishnu Kahar, who has been detained behind the bars since 13.07.2024 in connection with Special (POCSO) Case No. 24/2024 under Section 65(1) of BNS read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 1985. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 10.07.2024, the brother of the victim girl had lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-charge of Demow Police Station, inter alia, alleging that the petitioner had subjected his minor sister to forceful physical relationship. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is pressing for bail in this case mainly on the ground that at the time of his arrest though notice under Section 47 was served on him, same does not contain any grounds of arrest and, therefore, it is a violation of the Constitutional mandate of Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India as well as the observations of the Apex Court in the case of “Prabir Purkayastha Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)”, reported in “(2024) 8 SCC 254” as well as Vihaan Kumar Vs. State of Haryana”, reported in “(2025) 5 SCC 799”. 5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor as well as learned Amicus Curiae have also submitted that though there are incriminating materials against the petitioner on record, however, on perusal of the notice under Section 47 served on the petitioner, it is apparent that no grounds of arrest were mentioned there. 6.
I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and have gone through the scanned copy of the records of Special (POCSO) Case No. 24/2024 which was requisitioned in connection with this
Page No.# 3/3 case. 7. It appears that though notice under Section 47 of BNSS was served on the petitioner, however, it does not contain any grounds of arrest. In the cases referred by the petitioner cited herein above, the Apex Court has observed that furnishing grounds of arrest in writing to an arrestee at the time of his arrest is a requirement of Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India and any violation of said constitutional mandate would vitiate the arrest of an arrestee and on that ground he would be entitled to get bail. 8. As in the instant case also, there appears to be violation of fundamental rights of the petitioner guaranteed under Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India. As no basic facts which necessitated the arrest of the petitioner were mentioned in the notice under Section 47 of the BNSS which was served on him, he is entitled to get bail on that count. 9. Accordingly, the above named petitioner is allowed to go on bail of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) with one surety of like amount subject to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Sivasagar with following conditions:- (i) That the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to the victim girl or to the witnesses or any other 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; (ii) That the petitioner shall co-operate in the trial;
10. This bail application is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant