Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010225902025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3264/2025 SAUMITRA NATH @ SOUMITRA NATH S/O- LATE SAMANTA NATH @ SHYAMTA NATH, R/O- KARAKASHYA LANE, SHIBBARI ROAD, TARAPUR, P.S. SILCHAR, DISTRICT- CACHAR, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H R A CHOUDHURY, MR. N UDDIN,MR. M ISLAM,MR S K CHHETRY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER Date : 23.10.2025 Heard Mr. H. R. A. Choudhury, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R. J. Baruah, learned Addl. P.P., Assam. This application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS, seeking bail of the petitioner, namely, Saumitra Nath @ Soumitra Nath, who was arrested on 25.09.2025 in connection with Silchar P.S. Case No. 951/2025 under Sections 117(2)/64/75/76/78/79 of BNS. Page No.# 2/3 The allegation made against the petitioner is that on 25.09.2025, the informant lodged an FIR before Silchar Police Station, alleging inter-alia that she is working in the District Commissioner’s office, Cachar Election Branch, Silchar and since last year, she was harassed by the petitioner sexually at her workplace, as both are working in the same department. Consequently, on 24.09.2025 at about 3 PM, the petitioner raped her and as a result, she sustained injuries and suffered both mentally and physically. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that regardless of the allegation, which are denied by the petitioner, the petitioner has been in custody almost for 30 days. Considering the stage of investigation, there is no necessity for keeping him in detention any further. On the other hand, the learned APP has placed the CD before this Court and drawn the attention of the Court to the statement of the victim recorded before the Magistrate as well as the police, wherein the victim has consistently implicated the petitioner. On a close perusal of the CD, it appears that the independent witness, who is a colleague of both the petitioner and the victim, has supported the story of the victim. It has also been submitted that the petitioner is going through a divorce case against his wife and the victim is a close friend of the wife of the petitioner and, therefore, she has falsely implicated the petitioner. However, on a perusal of the materials available in the case diary, including the statement of the petitioner himself, such a proposition does not appear to be tenable. Page No.# 3/3 Having regard to the above as well as the gravity of the offence alleged, the prayer for bail is rejected at this stage. Send back the CD. The bail application is accordingly dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant