Page No.# 1/5 GAHC030008482025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./60/2025 Sh. Jacob Lalrohmingthanga CTI, Gate-2, Sesawng, Seling VERSUS The State of Mizoram Aizawl Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr Lalchhanliana Khiangte Advocate for the Respondent : P.P./Addl.PP, Mizoram BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI ORDER 12.03.2026 Heard Mr. Lalchhanliana Khiangte, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Ms. Linda L. Fambawl, learned Public Prosecutor, Mizoram for the State as well as Mr. Zonathan Lalrintluanga, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the respondent No. 2/informant of the case. The present application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed seeking enlargement of the applicant, Shri. Jacob Lalrohmingthanga, who was arrested on 20.09.2025 in connection with All Women Police Station Page No.# 2/5 Case No. 66/2025 registered under Section 8 of the POCSO Act read with Section 75(2)(3) of the BNS, 2023. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that the informant/respondent No. 2 lodged an FIR on 20.09.2025 alleging, inter-alia, that on 20.09.2025 at around 2:30 AM the accused applicant laid beside the victim while she was sleeping on her bed and toughed her breast by sliding his hand inside the victim’s shirt and also inserted his hands inside the victim’s pant and touched her private part. Upon completion of the investigation, charge-sheet dated 14.10.2025 has been filed by the Investigating Officer before the Special Court, POCSO, Aizawl under Section 8 of the POCSO Act read with Section 75(2)(3) of the BNS, 2023. Pertinent that the petitioner had earlier filed two bail applications before the learned Special Court, POCSO, Aizawl. His first bail application, i.e., B.A. No. 590/2025 was preferred before completion of the investigation, which was rejected by the learned Special Court, POCSO by order dated 15.10.2025 considering the stage of the investigation. His 2nd bail application, i.e., B.A. No. 673/2025 which was filed after filing of the charge-sheet was also rejected by the learned Special Court, POCSO, Aizawl by order dated 02.12.2025 by holding that it is premature to enlarge the applicant on bail. Mr. Lalchhanliana Khiangte, learned counsel for the accused applicant submits that since the investigation is already complete and the charge-sheet has been filed and also the statement of all the witnesses have already been recorded by the Investigating Officer including the statement of the victim, the possibility of the accused applicant to temper with the evidence is ruled out. He further submits that the trial is yet to commence wherein 10 prosecution Page No.# 3/5 witnesses are listed as prosecution witnesses. Considering the same, he submits that the trial is not likely to end soon. He further submits that there are no adverse antecedents on record disclosed by the I.O. against the applicant. Hence, he prays that the accused applicant be enlarged on bail. Per contra, Ms. Linda L. Fambawl, learned Public Prosecutor, Mizoram, vehemently opposing the prayer for bail, submits that it has clearly come out from the statements of the victim supported by the other prosecution witnesses that the accused applicant has committed the offence charged. She further submits that since the cousin sister of the victim, who supported the immediate attending circumstances, is a friend of the accused applicant, there is a possibility that he may influence her, if released on bail. She further submits that the offences charged being grave in nature, bail ought not to be granted to the accused applicant. Similarly, Mr. Zonathan Lalrintluanga, learned amicus curiae appearing for the respondent No. 2/informant of the case submits that since the accused applicant is charged with serious offences under the POCSO Act, he may not be enlarged on bail. I have given my prudent consideration to the arguments advanced on behalf of the parties and have also gone through the materials available on record, including the TCR. It appears that the charge-sheet has been submitted by the I.O. after completion of the investigation. It further appears from the statements of the victim recorded under Section 161 CrPC that she has clearly implicated the accused applicant for the offence charged. Undoubtedly, the offence charged is grave. However, the object of bail is Page No.# 4/5 not to punish the accused, but to secure his appearance during the trial. It appears that there are 10 prosecution witnesses listed for evidence during trial and the trial is yet to commence. It further appears that the accused applicant is in custody for last more than 5 months. It further appears that there is nothing adverse against the antecedents of the accused applicant available in the case diary. That apart, the learned PP, Mizoram has not brought to the notice of the Court any adverse antecedents of the accused applicant at the time of hearing nor has submitted any material indicating that the accused applicant is likely to jump the trial, if released on bail. In view of the above, keeping the legal principles relating to bail, i.e., bail is the rule jail is the exception, in mind and upon proper evaluation of the materials available on record, vis-à-vis, Article 21 of the Constitution of India, I am of the considered opinion that further custodial detention of the accused applicant is not justified. Accordingly, the accused applicant, named above, shall be released on bail in connection with the aforementioned case on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) only, with 2 (two) securities each of the like amount, out of which one should be a local surety, to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court, subject to the following conditions: - (i) that the accused applicant shall appear before the learned Trial Court on each and every date, to be fixed by the Court; (ii) that the accused applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; Page No.# 5/5 (iii) that the accused applicant shall submit his Aadhar Card, PAN Card and Passport, if any, before the learned Trial Court. (iv) that the accused applicant shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the learned Trial Court, without obtaining prior written permission from the said authority; and (v) that the accused applicant or any one acting on his behalf, shall not come near the vicinity of the victim or the informant of the case. It is made clear that in case of any violation of any of the above bail conditions by the accused applicant, the bail granted to him shall stand automatically vacated. With the above observations and directions, the instant bail application stands disposed of. Return the TCR. The necessary fee of Rs. 7,500/- shall be paid to Mr. Zonathan Lalrintluanga, learned amicus curiae appearing for the respondent No. 2/informant of the case by the Mizoram State Legal Services Authority. JUDGE Comparing Assistant