Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010227292025 2025:GAU-AS:13873 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3334/2025 MD ALI HUSSAIN SON OF SALAM ALI R/O BALIJAN PATH, NEAR HITESWAR SAIKIA PUKHURI,P.S. HATIGAON, GUWAHATI-781038, DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM, PERMANENT ADDRESS- KANDHULIMARI,P.O. KALATOLI P.S. CHHAYGAON, DIST. KAMRUP, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:JAHANGIR ALOM S/O AZIBAR RAHMAN R/O BALIJAN PATH P.S. HATIGAON GUWAHATI DIST. KAMRUP (M) ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR N AHMED, MR. B CHOWDHURY,MD. K ALI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 16.10.2025 Heard Mr. B. Chowdhury, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. K.K. Das, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State. By this application, the petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Sessions Special (POCSO) P.S Case No. 178/2025 registered under Section 87/3(5) of BNS, 2023 read with Section 4 of the POCSO Act pending before the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge (POCSO), Kamrup (M), Guwahati corresponding to Hatigaon P.S Case No. 104/2025. The FIR dated 10.06.2025 reveals that the daughter of the informant was missing on a particular day and on the next day, two (2) persons brought her home and on asking the daughter of the informant, the victim replied that one Kenta and the petitioner had picked her up in a 4 wheeler vehicle, took her to an isolated place and Kenta committed sexual offence with her and later on, they dropped her at a particular road. Mr. B. Chowdhury, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the police after completion of investigation had submitted charge sheet and in the same, the police had charged the co-accused for the offence under the POCSO Act. However, Page No.# 3/4 as far as the petitioner is concerned, the police has charged him under Section 305/331(4) of the BNS, 2023. He submits that the petitioner was driving the said vehicle and that he has no connection whatsoever with the offence in question. On the other hand, Mr. K.K. Das, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor however submits that there are allegations that the petitioner was driving the vehicle and he and the other co-accused had picked up the victim from the road and they took her to an isolated place and the co-accused committed sexual offence on the victim. He submits that although the provision under the POCSO Act is not attracted as far as the petitioner is concerned but Section 331 BNS is well attracted in the case of the petitioner. He as such prays that Trial Court Records may be called along with the statement of the victim and prays that bail may not be granted to the petitioner. I have heard the counsels and I have also gone through the records. It is noticed both in the FIR as well as the Charge Sheet that the petitioner was not involved in the offence under the POCSO Act and that the petitioner was driving the truck in which it is alleged that the victim was taken into and the co- accused committed sexual offence upon the victim. However, as far as the petitioner is concerned, there is no allegation of any offence under the POCSO Act although Section 305 and 331(4) of the BNS is alleged against the petitioner. In view of the discussion made above, this Court finds it fit to release the Page No.# 4/4 petitioner on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with one (1) local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court with the following conditions:- (1) The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation and appear before the Trial Court as and when called for. (2) The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or influence any of the witnesses. (3) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without the permission of the said Court. Petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant