Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010179702025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Bail Appln./2548/2025 HEMANTA BORAH SON OF BHADESWAR BORAH RESIDENT OF VILL- NAPAMUWA GAON P.O. AND P.S. CHOTIA DIST. BISWANATH CHARIALI ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR. A SAIKIA Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 10.09.2025 Heard Mr. S.M. Abdullah, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D.P. Goswami, Page No.# 2/3 learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. This application has been filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for granting bail to the accused petitioner, namely Hemanta Borah in respect of Dispur P.S. Case No. 604/2025 under Section 143(3)/144(2) of BNS, 2023 read with Section 5(1) of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956. Case diary is received. Perused the same. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the present petitioner is innocent and he is no way connected with the alleged offence. He submits that the present petitioner is a driver by profession and on the day of the incident also, the informant called him to Airport, and as a driver, he only went to the Airport, that apart, there is no specific allegation against the accused petitioner showing his involvement in the alleged offence. He also submits that when he went to Airport to pick up the informant, he was along with two girls, who were known to the informant and as per the instruction, he dropped the said two girls near Kalashetra, Guwahati. But surprisingly, when he reached the back side of the said Airport, some young boys came and started torturing the present petitioner. He further submits that after his arrest, the petitioner was under three days police remand and after the remand period, there is no further prayer from the I/O for custodial interrogation. More so, the accused petitioner is in custody since last 53 days and thus, the I/O got sufficient opportunity to interrogate the present petitioner keeping them in custody and hence, his further custodial interrogation may not be necessary for the purpose of investigation. However, he is ready and willing to extend his cooperation in the further investigation of the case, if he is allowed to go on bail. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that there are sufficient incriminating materials against the petitioner in the case diary who is involved in supplying the girls for immoral trafficking and they basically targeted the poor girls and he also engaged himself in arranging the customers for the prostitution. He further submits that the present petitioner along with the co-accused tried to contact some poor girls and on the pretext of giving jobs on beauty parlour and some other institution, they used those girls for the prostitution purpose. Accordingly, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that there are sufficient incriminating materials against the petitioner and from the statement made by the victims also, it is seen that the poor girls were targeted and they were forced to go the for prostitution. Accordingly, he raised objection in grating bail to the petitioner. I have heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and also perused the case Page No.# 3/3 diary. It is seen that there are some incriminating materials against the present petitioners. However, considering the materials in the case diary and the length of detention already undergone by the petitioner, I find that further custodial detention may not be necessary for the purpose of investigation of the case. Accordingly, I find it a fit case to extend the privilege of bail to the present petitioner. Accordingly, it is provided that on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (rupees twenty thousand) only with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction learned Chief Judicial Magisrate, Kamrup(M), the accused petitioner named above be enlarged on bail subject to the following conditions:- i) that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required; 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 him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. iii) That the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned CJM, Kamrup(M) without prior permission. In terms of the above, the bail application stands disposed of. Return the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant