Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010235702025 2025:GAU-AS:15804 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6179/2025 SAHERA BIBI W/O- SAIFUR RAHMAN, R/O- VILL.- BERBHANGI PART-II, P.O. DIMAKURI, P.S. GOLAKGANJ, DIST.- DHUBRI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, HOME DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GHY-6 2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM ULUBARI GUWAHATI-07 3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER DHUBRI ASSAM P.O. P.S. AND DIST.- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 783301 4:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE DHUBRI P.O. DHUBRI DIST.- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 783301 5:OFFICER-IN-CHARGE Page No.# 2/4 GOLAKGANJ POLICE STATION GOLAKGANJ P.O. GOLAKGANJ DIST.- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 783334 6:INCHARGE NALLIA POLICE OUT POST UNDER GALAKGANJ P.S. DIST.- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 783334 7:EAKUB ALI S/O- AMIN ALI R/O- VILL- TISTERPAR P.S. AND DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 78332 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A RAHMAN, E HUSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY ORDER 20.11.2025 Heard Mr. A. Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B.J. Talukdar, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. P.K. Medhi, learned counsel for the State respondents. 2. The petitioner herein has alleged that the petitioner lodged a number of First Information Reports [FIRs] with regard to harassment caused to her daughter by a person named in the FIR. But, the FIRs were not registered and investigated into. 3. From the instructions placed by Mr. Talukdar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the State respondents issued vide Letter bearing Memo no. DBB/CR-WP(C)-6179/2025/4775 Page No.# 3/4 dated 19.11.2025 from the Senior Superintendent of Police, Dhubri, it is noticed with regard to the incidents, alleged by the petitioner, three FIRs were lodged by the petitioner herself. 4. The FIR lodged by the petitioner on 25.05.2024 had been registered as Golakganj Police Station Case no. 118/2024 under Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences [POCSO] Act. After investigation, Golakganj Police Station Case no. 118/2024 culminated in a charge sheet vide Charge-Sheet no. 240/2024 dated 31.10.2024. 5. Another FIR lodged by the petitioner on 09.04.2025 has been registered initially as Nalia P.P. General Diary Entry no. 102 dated 09.04.2025. An enquiry was initiated thereafter. After the enquiry, a case has been registered as Golakganj Police Station Case no. 280/2025 under Sections 87/125[2] of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita [BNS], 2023 read with Section 4 of POCSO Act. As per the instructions, investigation of the case is in progress as on date. 6. On 20.06.2025, the petitioner submitted another FIR regarding the same matter and the same was forwarded to the Officer In-Charge, Golakganj Police Station for preliminary enquiry. 7. Another incident, which occurred on 02.09.2025, was reported by one Abdul Hai a VDP member, relating to the same accused person named in the FIRs lodged by the petitioner and the daughter of the petitioner. The said FIR, was registered as Nalia P.P. General Diary Entry no. 18 dated 02.09.2025. During the enquiry, both the accused and the daughter of the petitioner were interrogated. During the enquiry, the statements of the daughter of the petitioner and the petitioner were also recorded. The daughter of the petitioner was also sent to Dhubri Medical College & Hospital for a forensic medical examination, but she refused to undergo the examination. The instructions further state that the statements of the daughter of the petitioner and the petitioner were also recorded and after the statements of the daughter of the petitioner recorded by videography, no cognizable offence was found to be made out from the event reportedly occurred on 02.09.2025. 8. In the face of such instructions, the averments and the allegations made in the writ Page No.# 4/4 petition are considered. Contrary to the averments and the allegations made in the FIRs, it is found that actions were taken on the basis of all the three FIRs lodged by the Police. 9. In such view of the matter, Mr. Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the writ petition can be closed at this stage, with liberty to seek appropriate remedy in the event of any cause of action in future. 10. In view of the same above submission made by the learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is closed. 11. Liberty is always available to the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy in the event there arises any other cause of action at a later point of time. 12. The copy of the Office Letter bearing Memo no. DBB/CR-WP(C)-6179/2025/4775 dated 19.11.2025 is to be kept as part of the case record. JUDGE Comparing Assistant