Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010196632024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2567/2024 AFSAR ALI SHEIKH S/O- SAHAJAMAL SHEIKH, VILL- MAYERCHAR, PART VI (BOLIRCHAR), P.O- NAYERALGA, P.S- BILASIPARA, DIST-DHUBRI, ASSAM, PIN-783348 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS REP BY THE PP ASSAM 2:BISWAJYOTI DEBNATH SI DISPUR P.S C/O- THE O/C DISPUR P.S P.O AND P.S- DISPUR DIST- KAMRUP (M) GUWAHATI-06 3:HALIMA KHATUN W/O- AFSAR ALI SHEIKH D/O- AIJJAR RAHMAN VILL- MAYERCHAR PART VI (BOLIRCHAR) P.O- NAYERALGA Page No.# 2/4 P.S- BILASIPARA DIST-DHUBRI ASSAM PIN-78334 Advocate for the Petitioner : MALBAR HUSSAIN, MR M KHAN,MR. R I MONDAL Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR A ALIM SK (R-3) BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MALASRI NANDI ORDER 22.01.2025 Heard Mr. R. I. Mondal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. R. Kaushik, learned Additional Public Prosecutor and Mr. A. Alim S.K., learned counsel for the respondent no. 3. This is an application filed under Section 482 of BNSS, praying for pre-arrest bail by the petitioner, namely, Afsar Ali Sheikh, in connection with Session (Special) Case No. 51/2024, (arising out of Dispur P.S Case No. 205/2023-U/S-376 IPC R/W Section 6/17 of POCSO Act, 9/10/11 0f the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006) pending before the Special Judge, POSCO, Kamrup(M), Guwahati. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that as per the school certificate and the pan card, the victim was born on 11.06.2002 and her marriage was solemnized with the petitioner in the year 2022, as such at that time of marriage, the victim was 20 years of age. Hence, the provision of Child Marriage Act and the Posco Act are not attracted here in this case. It Page No.# 3/4 is further submitted that after their marriage, they lived together as husband and wife and out of their wedlock, one child was also born in the year 2023. Under such backdrop, learned counsel for the petitioner prays that benefit of pre-arrest bail may be extended to the petitioner. On the other hand, Mr. R. R. Kaushik, learned Additional Public Prosecutor and Mr. A. Alim S.K., learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3 have no objection if the petitioner is released on bail. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. I have also perused the Trial Court record. Considering the facts as well as the materials available thereon, this Courts finds that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Therefore, he may be granted the privilege of pre-arrest bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to appear before the Trial Court within 10 days from today and in the event of filing any bail application, he shall be released on bail, in connection with the above noted case on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 30,000/- with a suitable surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Special Judge, Posco, Kamrup (M), Guwahati. The direction for bail is subject to the conditions that the petitioner: (a) shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the learned trial court without prior written permission from him/her till disposal of the case. (b) shall not, directly or indirectly, make any Page No.# 4/4 inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. The anticipatory bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant