Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010228472025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3328/2025 RABBUL ALI SON OF HABIBUR RAHMAN, RESIDENT OF CHALCHALI, P.S-NAGAON, DISTRICT- NAGAON, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM 2:MUSSTT MOFIDA BEGUM WIFE OF RUBBUL ALI RESIDENT OF VILL- BORBHETI P.O- BORBHETI M P.S-NAGAON DIST- NAGAON ASSAM PIN -782122 (INFORMANT Advocate for the Petitioner : MR A KHANIKAR, R L CHUTIA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS. Z A ASADIA (R-2),DR. P AGARWAL, AMICUS CURIAE, R-2 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER 17.12.2025 Heard Mr. A. Khanikar, learned counsel appearing for the Page No.# 2/4 accused/applicant. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Addl. P.P., Assam appearing for the State. This is an application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for granting bail to the accused/applicant in connection with Nagaon P.S. Case No.583/2025 registered under Section 85 of the BNS, 2023 read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act. The gist of the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. dated 21.07.2025 is that the informant’s husband, who married another lady, was staying with the informant’s minor daughter along with her grandmother. It was alleged that on several occasions the accused/applicant had committed rape on the minor daughter of the informant and on one occasion when she got the opportunity, she fled from the place and went to her mother. On intimation to the mother, the mother has filed the F.I.R. On receipt of the F.I.R., Nagaon P.S. Case No.583/2025 under the aforementioned sections was registered against the accused/ applicant and in course of the investigation the accused/applicant was arrested on 22.07.2025. Mr. Khanikar, learned counsel for the accused/applicant submits that the accused/applicant has already spent more than 151 days behind the bars. The learned counsel further submits that the allegations made in the F.I.R. are not correct as the real story is something else. He Page No.# 3/4 submits that, in fact, the statement of the grandmother recorded by the police gives a different story and there are various contradictions amongst the statements of the witnesses including the statement of the victim and the informant. He submits that since the charge-sheet has already been submitted and formal charge is yet to be framed, it will take reasonable time to conclude the trial and since the accused/applicant has spent more than 151 days is custody, he should be released on bail at this stage. The learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposed the above submissions and by referring to the materials available on record submits that there are incriminating materials against the accused/applicant of his involvement in the instant case. The learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the respondent No.2 supports the submissions made by the learned Addl. P.P. The learned Amicus Curiae further submits that in the event of the accused/applicant’s release on bail at this stage, the accused/applicant may influence or manipulate the witnesses including the minor victim girl. In view of the aforesaid, she opposes the prayer for bail of the accused/applicant at this stage. This Court has gone through the materials brought on record as well as the TCR in the instant case. After going through the materials available before this Court, this Court is of the prima-facie opinion that there are Page No.# 4/4 certain incriminating materials which points finger to the involvement of the accused/applicant in the offence alleged in the instant case. In view of the aforesaid, this Court is of the opinion that this is not a fit case for granting the privilege of bail to the accused/applicant at this stage. Accordingly, the Bail Application is hereby dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant