Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010263202025 2025:GAU-AS:16306 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./1495/2025 NUR MUHAMMAD S/O-SULTAN ALI, VILL-BORKURANI,P.S-MAYONG, DIST-MORIGAON ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:MUSST. MARFUJA KHATUN @ MARAFUJA W/O ABU HUSSAIN @ HUSSAIN ALI VILL- BORKURANI P.S. MAYONG DIST. MORIGAON ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M ALI, MR J FIRDAUS,MD. ANARUL ISLAM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR ORDER 28.11.2025 Heard Mr. M. Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam, appearing for the State respondent. This application has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Page No.# 2/2 Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, being aggrieved by the order dated 31.10.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Morigaon, Assam, in POCSO Case No.89/2025, by which non-bailable warrant of arrest has been issued against the petitioner. Mr. Ali, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and till the issuance of NBWA against him, he had no knowledge about the case and he never received any summon from the learned Trial Court for his appearance also. But, on the basis of the false report of the process server, the learned Trial Court assumed that the summon has been duly served to him and accordingly, the learned Trial Court vide order dated 31.10.2025 had issued the NBWA against him. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is willing to appear before the Special Court on the next date fixed i.e. on 29.12.2025 and it is apprehended that before his appearance, he may be taken into custody. Mr. Parasar, learned Additional P.P. has submitted that in case the petitioner is allowed to appear before the Special Court on the next date fixed, and the requirement of his further detention is allowed to be decided by the learned Trial Court in the facts and circumstances, the same would suffice the cause of justice. Having regard to the submission made, this Court deems it fit to keep the order dated 31.10.2025 in abeyance till 29.12.2025, to facilitate the petitioner to appear before the learned Trial Court. It is made clear that the aforesaid orders have not been interfered with on merits and on the appearance of the petitioner before the learned Trial Court, the learned Trial Court would be at liberty to decide the manner in which the presence of the petitioner during the trial can be further secured. In terms of above, the criminal petition accordingly stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant