Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010225572025 2025:GAU-AS:14969 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3281/2025 GITA PAUL W/O- AJAY CH. SHILL, R/O- VILL- KALDOBA PT-II, P.S.. AGOMONI, DIST.- DHUBRI, ASSAM, PIN- 783335 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY P.P., ASSAM 2:MARJINA KHATUN W/O- DIDARUL ISLAM VILL- CHOTOGUMA P.S. GOLAKGANJ DIST.- DHUBRI (ASSAM) PIN- 78333 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M HUSSAIN, MR. A Z AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS. B CHETIA (R-2),S SEKH (R-2),MR. M U MAHMUD (R-2),MR SARFRAZ NAWAZ (AMICUS CURIAE, R2) Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER Date : 06.11.2025 Heard Mr. H. R. A. Choudhury, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the accused-applicant. Also heard Mr. K. K. Das, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, representing the State respondent and Mr. M. U. Mahmud, learned counsel, representing the respondent no. 2. 2. This is an application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, praying for granting bail to the accused-applicant in connection with Golakganj P.S. Case No. 233/2025, registered under Sections 76/70(2)/351(2)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023, read with Section 6/17 of the POCSO Act, 2012. 3. As per the allegations in the FIR dated 21.09.2025, lodged before Chagolia Police Out-post, the alleged incident involved some boys of the school who alleged to have sexually assaulted a minor girl of 5 years. Though the accused-applicant, who is a teacher at the school, she alleged to have not reported the incident to the concerned authorities, rather she punished the boys and warned the victim girl not to disclose about the incident to anyone. 4. Mr. H. R. A. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the accused- applicant submits that neither Section 6 nor Section 17 of the POCSO Act is applicable in the instant case and at the best which can be attracted in the instant case is Section 21 of the POCSO Act which criminalizes the act of non-reporting of an offence under the POCSO Act. He submits that the said offence is punishable with imprisonment up to 1 year or fine. He submits that as per the application of Section 21 of the POCSO Act, the issue of bail would be governed by the BNSS in such a situation and in the instant case, the offence will be bailable. In this regard, the learned Senior Counsel has relied on the case of Sushil Kumar vs. State of Himachal Pradesh, Cr. MPM No. 2705/2023. The Page No.# 3/4 learned Senior Counsel has submitted that the accused-applicant was arrested on 23.09.2025 and was granted interim bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 17.10.2025 and after that the accused-applicant has appeared before the Investigating Officer and her statement was recorded by the Investigating Officer. In view of the aforesaid, he submits that since the accused-applicant is already co-operating with the investigation, the interim bail so passed should be made absolute. 5. Mr. K. K. Das, learned Addl. P.P. submits that the offence committed by the accused-applicant is of serious nature and investigation in the matter is still going on. Therefore, he opposes granting of bail to the accused-applicant. 6. Mr. M. U. Mahmud, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 2, on the other hand, submits that the offence committed by the accused-applicant, being a teacher of the school, is not pardonable. More so, because of the fact that the accused-applicant has not disclosed the names of the students who allegedly to have assaulted the minor victim girl. 7. This Court has gone through the Case Diary submitted before this Court, which revealed that investigation in the matter is going on and statements of the victim, other witnesses as well as the accused-applicant have already been recorded by the Investigating Officer. 8. Taking into account the fact that the offence alleged to have been committed by the accused-applicant will draw Section 21 of POCSO Act, rather than Section 6 & 17 of the POCSO Act, which shall draw punishment with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year and with fine and which is bailable, this Court is of the opinion that the interim order so passed earlier should be made absolute with the same terms and conditions as directed in the order dated 17.10.2025. 9. Accordingly, the instant bail application is disposed of as allowed. Case Diary so received to be sent back. Page No.# 4/4 JUDGE Comparing Assistant