Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010169652025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1862/2025 SOFIQUL ISSLAM S/O- AKBAR ALI. R/O- VILL.- BAGHMARA, P.O.- GAURIPUR, P.S.- GAURIPUR, DIST.- DHUBRI, ASSAM, PIN - 783331. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM. 2:SHAALOM SHEIKH. S/O- HASEN ALI SHEIKH. R/O- VILL.- MAJERCHAR P.S.- DHUBRI DIST.- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN - 783325 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR A A DEWAN, MR H A RASHID Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, K ZAMAN (R-2),MR S PRODHANI(R-2),MR A ALIM SK(R-2) Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER Date : 16.09.2025 1. Heard Mr. A.A Begum, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam and Mr. A Alim Sk, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 2/informant. 2. This is an application under Section 482 BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of pre-arrest bail to the accused petitioner Mr. Sofiqul Sheikh @ Sofiqul Islam in connection with Dhubri P.S. Case No. 282/2025 (Corresponding to G.R Case No. 934/2025) under Section 78/75(2)/351(2) of the BNS, 2023 R/W Section 8 of POCSO Act, 2012. 3. The brief of the allegations against the accused petitioner, as reflected in the FIR, is that the petitioner used to harass the victim aged about 15 years when she used to go to school by making inappropriate remarks and upon reporting of the incident, the guardians of the accused petitioner proposed marriage. It is further alleged that on 13.06.2025, when the victim was returning from school, the accused person pulled her scarf and forcibly tried to take her to a secluded place and touched her body. Hence, the case. 4. Ms. T Begum, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was a love relationship between the accused and the victim and the incident referred to as having taken place on 16.06.2025 allegedly took place in broad daylight and such an incident could not have taken place in public. 5. Mr. A Alim Sk, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. Page No.# 3/4 2/informant has vehemently opposed the prayer for pre-arrest bail and has stated that in the event such pre-arrest bail is granted to the petitioner, the petitioner will resort to similar activities, in respect of the victim. 6. In the statement of the victim recorded before the Ld. Magistrate, there appears to be no such allegations of the petitioner having forcibly tried to take the victim to a secluded place. 7. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that stringent conditions may be imposed while granting pre-arrest bail to the petitioner so as to lay the apprehensions of the victim regarding future harassment. It is also submitted that the petitioner is himself a young person aged about 24 years. 8. Having regard to the nature of the allegations and also the statement of the victim recorded before the Ld. Magistrate, the present is not considered to be a case of such nature where the petitioner would be required to be taken into custody. 9. Considering the above, the prayer for pre-arrest bail is allowed on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with 2(two) sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority under the following conditions : (i) The petitioner shall not try to contact the victim directly or indirectly in any manner and shall not attempt to pressurize the family members in any way to desist from pursuing the case. (ii) The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation and appear before the I/O as and when called for. Page No.# 4/4 (iii) The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses connected with the case. (iv) The petitioner shall not leave his place of residence without the permission of the arresting authority. 2. Any violation of the conditions would result in cancellation of the instant order of pre-arrest bail. 3. In view of the above, the petition stands disposed of. 4. Send back the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant