Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010164702024 2025:GAU-AS:270 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2544/2024 PORESHNATH GUCHHAIT S/O LT. NANDALAL GUCHHAIT, R/O VILL- PHUKON PATTY, P.S. AND P.O.- DERGAON, DIST- GOLAGHAT, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM 2:NIRAJ KUMAR JHA S/O LATE PUNIT KUMAR JHA R/O SAHUPATTY P.S. AND P.O.-DERGAON DIST- GOLAGHAT ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K BORUAH, MS. P BORAH,MR. M ALAM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS. R CHOUDHURY (Amicus Curiae, R-2) Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER 08.01.2025 Heard Mr. M. Alam, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent No.1 and Ms. R. Choudhury, learned Amicus Curiae for the respondent No.2. This is an application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying for grant of bail to the accused/petitioner, who has been languishing in jail hazot in connection with Dergaon P.S. Case No.117/2023 [corresponding to Special (P) Case No.62/2023], registered under Section 376 of IPC read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act. The scanned copy of the Case Record, has been received and I have perused the same. It is submitted by Mr. Alam, learned counsel for the petitioner, that the petitioner was arrested in connection with this case on 15.07.2023, and has been in custody since then. The prosecution has already examined four witnesses, including the informant/victim of the case. Accordingly, he submits that, considering the length of detention already undergone by the petitioner, he may be granted bail. He further submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to appear before the learned Trial Court whenever his presence is required. He also submits that the petitioner is a permanent resident of the addressed locality, and there is no chance of him absconding if released on bail. On the other hand, Mr. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, has Page No.# 3/4 submitted that the victim was 15 years old at the time of the incident and has named the accused/petitioner in her testimony as well as in her statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 of the Cr.P.C. He further submits that the last witness was examined on 22.07.2024, and there is a likelihood of other witnesses being examined within a short period. Therefore, at this stage, he raises an objection to granting bail to the petitioner. Ms. Choudhury, learned Amicus Curiae, has submitted that this is a case involving very serious allegations. The victim was 15 years old at the relevant time of the incident, and when the First Information Report (FIR) was lodged, she was 6–7 months pregnant. Considering the seriousness of the allegations, she contends that the petitioner’s bail request should not be granted at this stage. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels for both sides, I have perused the scanned copy of the case record and the evidence recorded by the learned Court below. It is evident that the victim has implicated the name of the accused/petitioner, and the testimonies of the other witnesses (P.W. Nos. 3 and 4) corroborate those of P.W. Nos. 1 and 2. However, it is a fact that there is no immediate concern regarding the tampering or influencing of vital witnesses. Given this aspect of the case, coupled with the length of detention already undergone by the petitioner, I am of the opinion that further custodial detention is not required at this stage. Therefore, this court is of the opinion that privilege of bail can be granted to the accused/petitioner. Accordingly, it is provided that on furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) only with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, POCSO, Golaghat, the accused/petitioner, namely, Shri Poreshnath Guchhait, be enlarged on bail, Page No.# 4/4 subject to the following conditions: (i) that the petitioner shall appear before the Court of learned Special Judge, POCSO, Golaghat, on each and every date to be fixed by the Court; (ii) that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and (iii) that the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned Special Judge, POCSO, Golaghat, without prior permission. In terms of above, this bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant