Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010271202024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/3367/2024 SHAH ALAM @ SHWAH ALAM S/O LATE AFAZUDDIN R/O VILL- KARAGARI PATHER, P.O. CHAPERBORI P.S. BARPETA, DIST. BARPETA, ASSAM PIN-781352. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:ABDUL BATEN S/O KAMRUD ZAMAN SEIKH VILL- 1 NO. ABDHAGURI P.O. AND P.S. PANBARI DIST. CHIRANG BTR ASSAM MOB. 801199062 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R ALI, MD A RAHMAN,MR. SURAJIT DAS,MR SARFRAZ NAWAZ,A W AMAN,MR. R ISLAM,MR H A AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR S ISLAM (R2) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA Page No.# 2/3 ORDER Date : 13.02.2025 1. Heard Mr. S. Nawaz, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor as well as Mr. S. Islam, learned counsel for the respondent No.2. 2. This application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely Shah Alam @ Shwah Alam, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Panbari P.S. Case No.77/2024 under Sections 126/351(2) BNS, read with Section 4 of POCSO Act, 2012 in connection with POCSO Case No.40/2024. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 19.11.2024, the respondent No.2 approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bijni by filing a complaint alleging therein that on 12.11.2024 at about 9.00 a.m., the present petitioner had committed an offence of sexual assault by touching the breast and inserting his finger into the private parts of the minor daughter. 4. It is also alleged that three months prior to the filing of the said complaint, the petitioner also attempted to molest the minor daughter of the respondent No.2. It is further stated in the complaint that as there was an attempt to compromise the matter, there was a delay in filing the complaint. The said complaint was forwarded to the Officer-in-Charge of Panbari Police Station and on the basis of which, Panbari P.S. Case No.77/2024 was registered. 5. Mr. S. Nawaz, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this is a case where the provision of POCSO Act has been applied to settle with the present petitioner with whom the respondent No.2 had land dispute. He submits that the allegations made in the FIR by the respondent No.2 are not true. He submits that though it is alleged that on 12.11.2024 at 9.00 a.m., the alleged offence was committed, however at that time on that day, the petitioner was at Guwahati and to substantiate his submission he refers to the Annexure 3 appended to the bail application, from which it appears that the petitioner had took a ride from Guwahati Railway Station to Bishnu Rabha Path on that day at 9.20 am. He further submits that the land dispute between the parties has already been settled and to that effect an agreement has also been arrived at between the parties. 6. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the case diary and submits that in her statement recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, the victim girl has implicated the present petitioner. He also submits that the other witnesses whose statements are recorded by the Investigating Officer have also seen the victim crying on that day of the alleged offence. He also submits that the reason for lodging the complaint after seven days has been mentioned in the complaint itself by the Page No.# 3/3 respondent No.2. 7. On the other hand, Mr. S. Islam, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 has submitted that the land dispute between the parties has already been settled and he has no further submission as regards the prayer for bail of the present petitioner. 8. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and also gone though the materials available on record including the case diary of Panbari P.S. Case No.77/2024. 9. Though the victim girl has implicated the present petitioner in her statement made before the Magistrate under Section 183 of BNS, however, it is an admitted fact that there was a land dispute between the petitioner and the respondent No.2, which is now settled. It is also apparent from the record that there is a delay in filing the complaint by the complainant. The plea of alibi taken by the petitioner needs to be investigated during investigation, for which he may have to be interrogated by the Investigating Officer. 10. Considering the fact that the Investigating Officer has recorded the statement of other witnesses, including the victim girl and considering the delay in lodging the FIR as well as the documents produced by the petitioner in support of the plea of alibi taken by the petitioner, this Court is of the considered opinion that if the petitioner appears before the Investigating Officer and cooperate in the investigation, his custodial interrogation may not be necessary for fair completion of the investigation. 11. In view of the above, the petitioner namely, Shah Alam @ Shwah Alam is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer of Panbari P.S. Case No.77/2024 within a period of 10 (ten) days from the date of this order and cooperate in the investigation. If he does so within the stipulated period of time, in the event of his arrest in connection with the above noted case, he shall be allowed to go on bail of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Authority with the following condition:- (i) the petitioner shall appear before the I/O within 7 (seven) days from the date of this order and cooperate in the investigation; 12. With the above observation, the Anticipatory Bail application stands disposed of. 13. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant