Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010228732024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2925/2024 RAFIKUL HOQUE AND ANR S/O HABIBOR RAHMAN R/O VILL- JHAPUSABARI PART-V P.S. GOLAKGANJ DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM 2: HABIBOR RAHMAN ALIAS BERA SK S/O LATE AFSAR AHMED R/O VILL- JHAPUSABARI PART-V P.S. GOLAKGANJ DIST. DHUBRI ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REP BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:XXX D/O JOIBAR ALI VILL- KAIMARI PT.7 P.S. GOLAKGAN Advocate for the Petitioner : MRS. K DEVI, N DEB,MR. J KALITA,MS S A KHALIFA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 04.02.2025 1. Heard Mr. J. Kalita, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. P. S. Lahkar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. 2. This application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioners, namleyl, Rafikul Hoque 2. Habibor Rahman @ Bera Sk., who are apprehending their arrest in connection with Dhubri Special Case No. 48/2024 under Sections 9/10/11 of Prohibition of Child Marriage read with Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 17/4 of the POCSO Act, 2012. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that on the basis of FIR lodged before the Officer-in-charge of Golakganj Police Station, on 02.02.2023, by one Pashar Uddin Sk, President/Secretary of Kalmari Pt-7, VDP under Golakganj Police Station, Golakganj P.S. Case No. 86/2023 was registered and investigation as initiated. Ultimately, on completion of investigation, charge-sheet was laid against the above named petitioners under above mentioned provisions of law. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners have received summons from the Trial Court in Dhubri Special Case No. 48/2024 fixing 21.08.2024 as the date of appearance, however, they could not appear before the Trial Court on Page No.# 3/3 the said date and now there is an apprehension of getting detained behind the bars in connection with the said case, if they appear before the Trial Court. 5. On perusal of the records, it appears that the Trial Court has issued only summons to the petitioners, hence, the apprehension of getting detained on their appearance before the Trial Court appears to be unfounded and in the considered opinion of this Court may not be a ground for granting of anticipatory bail to the above named petitioners, the prayer for anticipatory bail is accordingly dismissed. 6. However, as the petitioners are ready to face the trial, they are directed to appear before the Trial Court within seven days from the date of this order. 7. On their appearance before the Trial Court in pursuant to this order, they may make prayer for regular bail before the Trial Court which shall be considered by the Trial Court as per law. 8. With the above observations, this anticipatory bail is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant