Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010158692025 2025:GAU-AS:9961 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2453/2025 ABU HOSEN S/O- LATE PAYJUDDIN SHEIKH. R/O- JHAPUSABARI PT-I, P.S.- AGOMONI , DIST.- DHUBRI, ASSAM, PIN -783324. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MRS. K DEVI, MS. N. YEPTHA.,MS. S. A. KHALIFA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 01.08.2025 1. Heard Mrs. K. Devi, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D.P. Goswami, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam. Page No.# 2/3 2. This application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita(BNSS), 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Abu Hosen, who has been detained behind the bars since 21.02.2025, in connection with Sessions Case No. 148/2025, pending in the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Dhubri. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been languishing behind the bars since 21.02.2025, and charge sheet has already been laid and charges are yet to be complete. 4. She further submits that the petitioner is ready to face the trial and unless he is released on bail, he may not be in a position to defend this case properly. 5. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed the grant of bail at this stage and has submitted that this case involves the offence of rape and no witness has yet been examined till date. 6. He submits that at least material witnesses should be examined before the prayer for bail of the petitioner is considered. 7. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and have gone through the record of the case. It appears that from the record that in the trial of the Sessions Case No. 148/2025, charges have been framed under Sections 329(4)/64(2)(f) (k) of BNS and the victim has not yet been examined and on that ground only, the Trial Court had rejected the bail of the petitioner on 10.07.2025. Page No.# 3/3 8. This Court does not find any error in the order of rejection of the Trial Court. 9. Considering the nature of offence involved in this case as well as the fact that the victim and the informant are not yet examined, this bail application is dismissed at this stage with an observation that the petitioner may approach the Trial Court and may file a regular bail application before the said Court after examination of the victim as well as the informant as prosecution witnesses by the Trial Court. JUDGE Comparing Assistant