Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010161932025 2025:GAU-AS:13712 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2476/2025 GOUTAM MANDAL @ GOTUAM MANDAL @ BISHAL S/O- GANESH CH. MANDAL. R/O- VILL.- DURAMARI, P.O.- LALMATI P.S.-ABHAYAPURI, DIST.- BONGAIGAON, ASSAM, PIN - 783384. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM. 2:SURYA MANDAL S/O- LATE NARAYAN MANDAL. VILL.-LALMATI DURAMARI P.O.- LALMATI P.S.- ABHAYAPURI DIST.- BONGAIGAON ASSAM PIN - 783384 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR A K AZAD, MR. I HUSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS. M K BROWN, (AMICUS CURIAE, R2) Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 14.10.2025 Heard Mr. A.K. Azad, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sharma, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and Ms. M.K. Brown, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the respondent No. 2. By this application, the petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Special (P) Case No. 55(A)/2025 arising out of Abhayapuri P.S. Case No. 53/2025 registered under Section 70(2) of the BNS, 2023 read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. The FIR dated 09.03.2025 reveals that the petitioner had given love proposal to the daughter of the informant and that after her school hours, the petitioner used to take her to different places and have committed sexual intercourse with her against her will. It is also stated that the petitioner had circulated the video clippings recorded in his mobile in respect of the said offence to his friends and that his friends had also taken the daughter of the informant to various places and have committed sexual offences upon her. Mr. A.K. Azad, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that Section 48 of the BNSS has not been followed in the instant case in as much as the relatives of the petitioner was not informed about the grounds of arrest of Page No.# 3/5 the petitioner. He has also submitted on the merit of the case and had stated that the petitioner has love relationship with the victim and the rest of the allegations made in the said FIR was concocted. Mr. B. Sharma, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor however, submits on perusal of the TCR that Section 48 of the BNSS has not been violated in the instant case and for that he has placed the order of the Special Judge dated 01.07.2025 wherein it was stated that the father of the petitioner was informed verbally about the grounds of arrest and that the father had put his signature on his arrest memo in addition to the accused who had also put his signature in the arrest memo. He as such, submits that there is no violation of Section 48 of the BNSS in the instant case. He has also placed the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS wherein she had alleged that the petitioner and others had committed sexual offences upon her. Ms. M.K. Brown, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the respondent No. 2 i.e., the informant had stated and placed Section 36 of the BNSS, 2023 which provides that the Police Officer after making an arrest shall inform the person arrested unless the memorandum is attested by the members of his family that he has the right to have relative of any person named to him to be informed of the arrest. She submits that the father of the petitioner was informed about the grounds of arrest and as such, Section 36 of the BNSS is complied together with Page No.# 4/5 Section 48 of the BNSS. I have heard the counsels and have gone through the records. It is noticed that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vihaan Kumar Vs. State of Haryana and Ors. reported in (2025) 5 SCC 799 has categorically held that requirement of communicating the grounds of arrest in writing is not only required in case of the arrested person but also to the friends, relatives or such other person as may be disclosed or nominated by the arrested person and the violation of the same would result in violation of Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India. It is also observed that any violation of Section 48 of the BNSS would result in vitiating the arrest and the arrested accused has a right to be released on bail instantly. It is noticed in the instant case more so in the order of the Special Judge that the father of the petitioner was informed verbally about the grounds of arrest and that he has also signed in the arrest memo but it is noticed in the order which shows that the grounds of arrest were not given to the father in writing as per the direction of the Hon’ble Apex Court. In view of the same, there is violation of Section 48 of the BNSS and the petitioner is entitled for his release. As such, the petitioner be release on bail on furnishing of a bail bond of Page No.# 5/5 Rs. 20,000/-(Rupees twenty thousand) with one (1) local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of Special Judge, North Salmara, Abhayapuri under the following conditions:- 1) The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation and shall appear before the Special Judge, North Salmara, Abhayapuri as and when called for. 2) The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or influence any of the witnesses. 3) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Special Judge, North Salmara, Abhayapuri without prior permission of the said Court. The petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant