Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010169632025 2025:GAU-AS:16314 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2498/2025 RANJAN BARMAN S/O LATE BICHITRA BARMAN R/O KOLIAPANI, AMBIKAGIRI PATH, BARMAN PATTY, DOOMDOMA P.O. DOOMDOOMA P.S. DOOMDOOMA DIST. TINSUKIA, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REP. BY THE LEARNED PP, ASSAM 2:SMTI. MINAKSHI BORAH W/O SRI BISNU BORA R/O KAPAHERA TEKELAGAON P.O. KAPAHERA P.S. MIKIRBHETA DIST. MORIGAON ASSAM PIN-782413 MOBILE NO. 9707203172 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N HASAN, MR. I K BURAGOHAIN,MR. A HASAN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS. P DAS, AMICUS CURIAE FOR R-2 Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS O R D E R 28.11.2025 Heard Mr. N. Hasan, learned Senior Counsel for the accused applicant. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent and Ms. P. Das, learned counsel for the informant no.2/respondent. 2. This is an application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2025, for grant of regular bail to the accused petitioner, namely, Ranjan Barman in connection with POCSO Case No. 102/2024 arising out of Doomdooma P.S.148/2024 pending before the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Tinsukia. 3. The case arose out of an FIR dated 11.09.2024 lodged by the victim boy's mother with the allegation that the petitioner, who was a football coach, had accompanied a team of teenagers and sexually abused the minor boy of the informant, who was part of that team. The accused was arrested on 15.09.2024. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the case is at the stage of trial but the same has not proceeded due to the Court being vacant. The learned counsel drawing attention to the relevant documents submits that compliance with section 47/48 of BNSS has not been done. 5. Ms. P. Das, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the informant has submitted that there are significant allegations against the petitioner and that there are also other cases pending against him. The learned Addl. P.P. submits that there are sufficient incriminating materials against the petitioner. 6. I have cross-checked the notices from the scanned record which is received. Sections 47 and 48 notices may be reproduced here in below:- Page No.# 3/5 NOTICE:-U/S 47 BNSS Ref:- Doomdooma P.S. Case No. 192/2024 U/S 377/506 IPC. R/W Sec. 6 of POCSO Act. To, Sri Ranjan Barman (42 yrs) S/O Late Bichitra Barman R/O Barman Patty, Koliapani PS Doomdooma, Dist. Tinsukia You are hereby informed that you are under arrest in connection with above reference case and the said case in non-bailable to police. So, you are show-arrested by Honorable Court, Tinsukia. You may appeal before Honorable Court for your bail. Signature of arrestee Signature of I/O NOTICE U/S 48 BNSS Ref: Doomdooma P.S. Case No. 148/2024 U/S 6 of POCSO Act To Sri Horen Barman (43 years) S/O Lt. Bicitra Barman R/O Kaliapuri, Ambikargiri Path. P.S. Doomdooma, Dist- Tinsukia You are hereby informed that your brother is arrested by this P.S. in connection with above referred case and will be forwarded to the Honorable Court of C.J.M., Tinsukia, as the case is non-bail-able to police. You may appeal before Honorable Court for his/her bail Signature of accused Sri Ranjan Barman (42 yrs) S/O Late Bichitra Barman, R/O Doomdooma Kaliapani Barman Patty PS Doomdooma, Dist-Tinsukia. Page No.# 4/5 Sign of the receiver:- Signature of the I/0 Doomdooma Police Station. 7. The aforesaid nature of the notices would clearly fail to meet the stipulated standards in terms of Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India and the laws in this regard laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Prabir Purkayastha (supra) and Vihaan Kumar (supra), which holds the field. 8. The learned Addl. P.P. has also drawn my attention to Section 479 (2) of BNSS, which reads as follows:- 479. Maximum period for which under trial prisoner can be detained:- (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section(1), and subject to the third proviso thereof, where an investigation, inquiry or trial in more than one offence or in multiple cases are pending against a person, he shall not be released on bail by the Court. 9. As it has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that once a person is found entitled to bail on the basis of non compliance with this constitutional requirement, such entitlement would not be defeated due to other restrictions like statutory bars. 10. In such view the matter, despite the nature of allegations and the adverse materials, the accused person herein is allowed to go on bail of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned learned Court and subject to the following conditions that:- (i) That the accused person shall be available during the trial, (ii) That the accused shall not hamper or tamper with evidence. (iii) That the accused shall not harass or intimidate or harm the informant/victim side Page No.# 5/5 in any manner. 11. In case of violation of any bail conditions, the prosecution/informant shall be at liberty to move a suitable application for cancellation of the bail application of the petitioner. 12. This bail application stands allowed and disposed of. 13. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant