Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010218132025 2025:GAU-AS:14307 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2412/2025 REZAUL KARIM ALIAS RAJIBUL ISLAM ALIAS REJAUL KARIM SON OF RASHIDUL HOQUE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KANDAPARA, BARPETA, PIN 781314 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM 2:JESMINA KHATUN W/O HASMAT ALI RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KANDHAPARA MOUZA JANIA PS BARPETA DISTRICT- BARPETA ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A S TAPADER, MR. H A LASKAR,MR M AHMED,MR. S B LASKAR Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM (R1), T UDDIN (R2),MR. S AHMED (R2) Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER 27.10.2025 1. Heard Mr. A.S. Tapadar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S. Ahmed, learned counsel for the respondent no.2. Also heard Mr. D.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, 1. Rezaul Karim @ Rajibul Islam @ Rejaul Karim, seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Barpeta P.S Case No. 102/2025 registered under Sections 61 BNS, 65(2) BNS, 352(2) BNS and Section 6 of POCSO Act, 2012. 3. The gist of allegation in the FIR dated 19.03.2025, is that on 10.09.2024, while the victim girl stated to be aged 10 years was coming from School, the accused stopped her and took her inside his home and committed rape upon her. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the allegations are false and that a false case has been lodged against the petitioner in the backdrop of the land dispute between the parties. 5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State based on the case diary he received, submits that the statement of the victim girl recorded before the learned JMFC during the investigation has supported the investigation and has impleaded the petitioner accused and further contends that it is not a fit case for Page No.# 3/3 grant of pre-arrest bail. 6. The learned counsel for the informant submits that the story of backdrop of land dispute is not correct and that the informant’s side is not aware of any such land dispute and points out that the age of the victim girl is only 10 years. 7. Upon perusing the said statement of the victim girl and the relevant materials, I find force in the contention of the prosecution that it may not be a fit case for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. 8. Therefore, the prayer for anticipatory bail application stands rejected. 9. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application stands disposed of. 10. Return back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant