Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010229412025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3329/2025 SRI ASHOK KHEMKA S/O-LT. PURUSHUTTAM KHEMKA,R/O- WARD NO.03,MISSION ROAD,P.S- BARPETA,ROAD,781315 DIST-BARPETA, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP. BY THE PP,ASSAM 2:MINATI BALA SAHU (INFORMANT) W/O-CHAMPA SAHU R/O-VILL-KALAHABHANGA BARPETA ROAD P.D. BARPETA ROAD DIST. BARPETA ASSAM PIN -78131 Advocate for the Petitioner : S K PODDAR, R MANDAL,MS. N PODDAR,MR. C SHARMA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. N MAHAJAN(AMICUS CURIAE)R2 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 14.11.2025 1. Heard Mr. S. K. Poddar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State as Mr. N. Mahajan, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the informant. Page No.# 2/4 2. This application under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Ashok Khemka who has been detained behind the bars since 06.09.2025 for last 70 days in connection with Special POCSO Case No. 88/2025 corresponding to Barpeta Road P.S. Case No. 102/2025 under Section 8 of POCSO Act. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 05.09.2025, the mother of the victim boy had lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-charge of Barpeta Road Police Station, inter alia, alleging that on that day when the minor son of the informant had gone to the school, the petitioner induced him and took him behind the corner of the shop and kissed him badly and opened the zip of his pant and touched him badly. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the accusations made against the petitioner in the FIR are not true. He submits that false accusation has been made by the mother of the victim boy as they have some outstanding dues in his shop. He further submits that otherwise also the petitioner has been languishing behind the bars for last 70 days and the investigation has already been completed and charge-sheet has been laid under Section 8 of the POCSO Act. 5. He further submits that maximum punishment for the offence under which charge-sheet has been laid is only 5 years. He also submits that the petitioner is ready to co-operate in trial and, therefore, the petitioner may be allowed to go on bail. 6. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that in his statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, the victim boy has vividly described the manner in which he was subjected to sexual Page No.# 3/4 assault by the petitioner. He submits that the victim boy is only about 11 years of age and, therefore, releasing the petitioner at this stage may give him an opportunity of influencing the main witness i.e., the victim boy. 7. On the other hand, learned Amicus Curiae has also opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner at this stage. He submits that the shop of the present petitioner is near the school of the victim boy and, hence, if the petitioner is released at this stage, there is every possibility of the petitioner influencing the victim boy. 8. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and have gone through the materials available on record including the scanned copy of the connected case diary as well as the case record. 9. In this case, though there are sufficient materials against the petitioner in the record and hence charge-sheet has been laid against him under Section 8 of the POCSO Act, however, as the maximum punishment prescribed for the offence with which he has been charged with in this case is only 5 years and he has already undergone detention for 70 days, this Court is of considered opinion if the petitioner co-operates in the trial and gives an undertaking not to influence the victim or any of the witnesses in any manner so as to dissuade them from deposing before the Trial Court, there may not be any necessity of detaining him during the period of the trial. 10. 10. In view of the above discussions made and submissions and reasons cited in the foregoing paragraph, the above named petitioner is allowed to go on bail of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) only with one surety of like amount subject to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Barpeta with following conditions:- Page No.# 4/4 i. That the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to the victim boy or to the witnesses or any other person who may be acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts of the case before the Court; ii. That the petitioner shall co-operate in the trial; 11. This bail application is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant