Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010113552025 2025:GAU-AS:13516 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1763/2025 FARID ALI S/O RAHAM ALI VILL- DAWARKUCHI P.S. TAMULPUR DIST. TAMULPUR, ASSAM PIN- 781367 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:AMINA KHATUN W/O MD. JAINUDDIN ALI VILL- N.K. DARRANGA (PAHARUPAR) P.S. TAMULPUR DIST. TAMULPUR ASSAM PIN-78136 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A ROSHID, MS. T BEGUM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. A MOBARAQUE (R-2) Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 26.09.2025 1. Heard Ms. T. Begum, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam, as well as Mr. A. Mobaraque, the learned counsel for the respondent No. 2. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that on the basis of an FIR lodged by the respondent No. 2 against the petitioner Farid Ali, the Tamulpur P.S. Case No. 76/2024 was registered, under Sections 363/365/376(2)(n)/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and after completion of the investigation, charge sheet was laid against the present petitioner, under the aforesaid provisions of law. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been detained behind the bars for the last 275 days and the trial is yet to commence. 4. She submits that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions imposed on him, while granting bail to him and he shall co- operate in the trial. 5. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor Page No.# 3/4 submits that till date, the examination of prosecution witnesses has not yet been started. He submits that before considering the prayer for bail of the petitioner, at least the victim girl may be examined. 6. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent No. 2/informant has submitted that the informant, who is the mother of the victim girl, who lodged the FIR, does not have any objection, if the petitioner is granted bail. 7. He also submits that the FIR was lodged due to some misunderstanding and the matter has been settled between the parties. 8. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides. 9. Considering the fact that the petitioner has been detained behind the bars for the last 275 days, also considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the informant/ respondent No. 2, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner in this case. 10. Accordingly, the above-named petitioner is allowed to go on bail of Rs. 30,000/-(Rupees Thirty Thousand only) with a suitable surety of like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge( POCSO), Baksa, Mushalpur with following conditions that:- (i) the petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court as and when called so required by the Trial Court; (ii) the petitioner shall co-operate in the trial of Tamulpur P.S. Case No. 76/2024 under Sections 363/365/376(2)(n)/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Page No.# 4/4 and (iii) the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to the informant or to any other person who may be acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts before the Trial Court in the trial pending against the present petitioner. 11. With the above observations, this bail application is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant