Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010194702025 2025:GAU-AS:15467 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2094/2025 SAFAR ALI SON OF DARUD ALI 2: ASHRAFUL HOQUE SON OF DARUD ALI 3: AMINIUR HOQUE SON OF SAFAR ALI ALL THE PETITIONERS ARE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KHERBARI PART IV KHERBARI AGOMONI DHUBRI ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REPRESENTED BY PP ASSAM 2:MOTIUR RAHMAN SON OF LATE JASIM UDDIN MUNSHI KHERBARI PART IV KHERBARI P/S. AGOMONI DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM-78333 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B HUSSAIN, MR. I A TALUKDAR Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR S NAWAZ,AMICUS CURIAE,(R-2) Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 13.11.2025 1. Heard Mr. I. A. Talukdar, the learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent as well as Mr. S. Nawaz, the learned counsel for the Amicus Curiae appearing for the respondent No.2 2. This application under Section 482 (1) of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioners, namely, (1) Safar Ali, (2) Ashraful Hoque, and (3) Aminiur Hoque, who are apprehending their arrest in connection in connection with Agomoni P. S. Case No. 70/2025, under Sections 140(3)/127(2)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023 read with Section 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that though the charge sheet has been filed against the present petitioners in connection with the Agomoni P. S. Case No. 70/2025 on 10.8.2025, however, no accusation has been made against them under any provision of the POCSO Act. Their main allegation against them is of kidnapping and wrongful confinement. 4. He, however, submits that as the petitioners have been shown as absconder in the charge sheet, they apprehends that on their appearance before the trial court, they may be remanded to custody. He submits that the petitioners are ready to cooperate in Page No.# 3/4 the trial, and therefore, they may be granted anticipatory bail in this case. 5. On the other hand, the Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr. B. Sharma as well as Mr. S. Nawaz, representing the Responder No. 2, has submitted that the accusation against the present petitioners are mainly under the provisions of BNS i.e. under Section 140(3)/127(2)/3(5) BNS, 2023, which entails punishment for not more than 7 years and, therefore, if they voluntarily appear before the trial court, there is every likelihood that they will be granted bail by the same court. 6. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides. 7. It appears that no accusation against an offence under POCSO Act has been made against the present petitioners. 8. The allegation against them is under the provision of BNS, 2023 for which maximum punishment prescribed is imprisonment up to 7 years. 9. Further, as the charge sheet has already been laid, they are likely to get summons from the trial court. Otherwise also, if they appear voluntarily before the trial court, even without receiving the summons before the said court, i.e., the court of learned Special Judge, POCSO, who is empowered to consider and grant bail, if it thinks fit, considering the facts and circumstances of the case. 10. Under such circumstances, this court is of considered opinion that this is not an appropriate case to issue a direction under Page No.# 4/4 Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 in favour of the present petitioners instead, they may approach before the trial court and make bail for regular bail, before the same court, on their appearance, if so, advised. 11. With the above observation, this anticipatory bail application is dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant