Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010180392025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1972/2025 MD ABDUL REJAK ALI ALIAS REJEK ALI AND 5 ORS SON OF HUSSEN ALI R/O VILL- LECHARI BORI, 1 NO. BURGAON, P.S. MAYONG, DIST. MORIGAON, ASSAM, PIN-782411. 2: MD. CHAIDUL ISLAM @ SAIDUL ISLAM SON OF HUSSEN ALI R/O VILL- LECHARI BORI 1 NO. BURGAO P.S. MAYONG DIST. MORIGAON ASSAM PIN-782411 3: MD. ABDUL MALEK ALI @ MALEK ALI S/O HUSSEN ALI RESIDENT OF VILL- LECHARI BORI 1 NO. BURGAON P.S. MAYONG DIST. MORIGAON ASSAM PIN-782411. 4: MD. MUKTAR ALI S/O HUSSEN ALI RESIDENT OF VILL- LECHARI BORI 1 NO. BURGAON P.S. MAYONG DIST. MORIGAON ASSAM PIN-782411. 5: MD. MUSKUR ALI Page No.# 2/6 SON OF HUSSEN ALI R/O VILL- LECHARI BORI 1 NO. BURGAON P.S. MAYONG DIST. MORIGAON ASSAM PIN-782411 6: MD. NASED ALI @ NASER ALI R/O VILL- LECHARI BORI 1 NO. BURGAON P.S. MAYONG DIST. MORIGAON ASSAM PIN-78241 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:SMTI. SAMOLA KHATUN W/O ABUL HUSSAIN D/O MUKLECH ALI A RESIDENT OF VILL- MERAR HABI P.S. MAYONG DIST. MORIGAON ASSAM PIN-782411 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S N TAMULI, MS. P K ZANNAT,MS. A BEGUM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. A A MONDAL(R-2),MR A ALAM (R-2),DR. P AGARWAL, Amicus Curiae, (R-2) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 26.09.2025 1. Heard Mr. SN Tamuli, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also Page No.# 3/6 heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam for the State as well as Mr. R. A. Ahmed, learned counsel for the respondent No.2. 2. This application under section 482 of BNSS has been filed by the petitioners, namely, (1) Md. Abdul Rajek Ali @ Rejek Ali, (2) Md. Chaidul Islam @ Saidul Islam, (3) Md. Abdul Malek Ali @ Malek Ali, (4) Md. Muktar Ali, (5) Md. Muskur Ali and (6) Md. Nased Ali who are apprehending their arrest in connection with Mayong P.S. Case No.105/2024 (with corresponding GR No.1224 of 2024) registered under sections 61(2)/65(1)/142 of BNSS and R/W Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. 3. The gist of acquisition in this case is that on 09.09.2024 the mother of the victim girl had lodged an FIR naming therein the present petitioners, inter alia, alleging that on 15.07.2024 the petitioners, namely, Md. Abdul Rajek Ali @ Rejek Ali and Md. Chaidul Islam @ Saidul Islam forcefully abducted the minor daughter of the informant. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioners are in no way involved in the offences in this case. He further submits that in the meanwhile the petitioner No.1, namely, Md. Abdul Rajek Ali @ Rejek Ali has already been arrested and therefore, this instant application under Section 482 BNSS against him has become infructuous. He further submits that no specific role has been ascribed to the other accused persons against in commission of the alleged offence. He further submits that petitioners are ready to cooperate with the investigation and custodial interrogation is not necessary for the completion of the investigation. 5. On the other hand learned Addl. Public Prosecutor has produced the Page No.# 4/6 case diary of Mayong P.S. Case No.105/2024 (with corresponding GR No.1224 of 2024) registered under sections 61(2)/65(1)/142 of BNSS and R/W Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and has submitted that though in the FIR acquisition has been made mainly against the petitioners, namely, Md. Abdul Rajek Ali @ Rejek Ali and Md. Chaidul Islam @ Saidul Islam, however, the victim girl has implicated Md. Abdul Rajek Ali @ Rejek Ali of subjecting her forceful sexual intercourse. She has also implicated the petitioner, namely, Md. Abdul Malek Ali @ Malek Ali, of taking her to Kerala where she was kept in detained for 5 days. On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant has objected to grant the anticipatory bail to the petitioners on the ground that they are involved in the commission of the alleged offence and they have been threatening the informant to withdraw the instant case. 6. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and has perused the materials in the case diary. 7. Though the learned counsel for the informant has opposed to the grant of bail to all the petitioners, however, the victim girl in her statement made under Section 183 BNSS has categorically implicated the petitioners no.1 & 3, namely, Md. Abdul Rajek Ali @ Rejek Ali Rajek Ali and Md. Abdul Malek Ali @ Malek Ali,. Except that she has not make any incriminating statement against any other co-accused persons. 8. Considering the fact that there are sufficient incriminating materials against the petitioner no.3, namely, Md. Abdul Malek Ali @ Malek Ali, whereas no such materials could be found at this stage against the other petitioners. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered opinion that this is not a fit case where anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner no.3, namely, Md. Abdul Page No.# 5/6 Malek Ali @ Malek Ali and hence, his prayer for bail is rejected. Moreover, as regard the petitioner no.1, namely, Md. Abdul Rajek Ali @ Rejek Ali Rajek Ali is concerned, since he has been arrested, his anticipatory bail stands infructuous. As regards other petitioners, namely, (2) Md. Chaidul Islam @ Saidul Islam, (4) Md. Muktar Ali, (5) Md. Muskur Ali and (6) Md. Nased Ali are concerned as there are no such incriminating materials against other in the case diary at this stage, this Court is of the view that if they are ready to cooperate with the investigation their custodial interrogation may not be necessary for fair completion of the investigation of Mayong P.S. Case No.105/2024 (with corresponding GR No.1224 of 2024) registered under sections 61(2)/65(1)/142 of BNSS and R/W Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. 9. In view of the above the above named petitioners, namely, (2) Md. Chaidul Islam @ Saidul Islam, (4) Md. Muktar Ali, (5) Md. Muskur Ali and (6) Md. Nased Ali are hereby directed to appear before the investigation officer of Mayong P.S. Case No.105/2024 (with corresponding GR No.1224 of 2024) registered under sections 61(2)/65(1)/142 of BNSS and R/W Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 within a period of 15 (fifteen) days from the date of this order and cooperate in the investigation. If they do so, within the stipulated period of time, in the event of their arrest in connection with the aforesaid case, they shall be granted interim bail of Rs.30,000/- only with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting atrocity with following conditions: (i) That the petitioners, namely, (2) Md. Chaidul Islam @ Saidul Islam, (4) Md. Muktar Ali, (5) Md. Muskur Ali and (6) Md. Nased Ali shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person who may be acquainted with the facts of the case Page No.# 6/6 so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts of the case before the Investigating officer; (ii) That the petitioners shall cooperate in the investigation. 10. Accordingly, the Anticipatory Bail application stands disposed of. Send back the case dairy. JUDGE Comparing Assistant