Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010233722025 2025:GAU-AS:17000 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3463/2025 ALONGBAR NARZARY S/O- LABIN NARZARY , R/O- VILLAGE- DAORAIBARI, P.S.- PANBARI, DIST.-CHIRANG, BTAD, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE P.P.ASSAM. 2:SANJIB MUSHAHARY S/O- LT. JOLESHWAR MUSHAHARY R/O-VILL- SAMARPUR P.S AND DIST.-KOKRAJHAR ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P K DAS, MR. M BARUAH Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. M ALOM (R-2) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR ORDER Date : 09-12-2025 Heard Mr. P.K Das, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Goswami, learned Addl. P.P for the State and Mr. M Alom, learned counsel Page No.# 2/3 appearing for the respondent No.2/informant who is the father of the victim. This application has been filed under section 483 of BNSS, 2023 praying for release of the petitioner on bail who was arrested on 28.05.2025 in connection with Special POCSO Case No. 64/2025 corresponding to Kokrajhar P.S Case No. 129/2025 u/s 329(4)65(1)351(2) of BNS, 2023 r/w section 4 of POCSO Act, 2012. The perusal of the FIR dated 26.05.2025 reveals that the father of the minor victim had stated that the accused had taken advantage of the absence of parents in the house and had physical relationship with the victim. Accordingly, the aforesaid Police case has been registered and the accused was arrested. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the relationship established, if any, was with the consent of the victim, as they were in love affairs. The learned counsel has submitted that keeping in view of the age of the petitioner who is about 20 years, he may be granted the privilege of bail since he has completed more than 195 days in custody. Mr. M. Alom, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2, the informant has submitted that he does not apprehend any influence or coercion by the petitioner. Mr. B. Goswami, learned Addl. P.P has submitted that the consent or other relationship with the minor in this case would be of no consequence since the provision of POCSO Act are involved. He accordingly prays that the petition may be rejected. We have gone through the contents of the petition and also the record called for. The case has been charge-sheeted. Therefore, there is little or no apprehension of tampering or hampering with the evidence collected by the I.O. Page No.# 3/3 The respondent No. 2/informant has not raised any apprehension regarding influencing of the prosecution witnesses. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner, aged about 20 years, is entitled to the privilege of bail at this stage. Accordingly, the petitioner shall be enlarged on bail by executing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two local surety of like amount to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court concerned subject to the following conditions shall be applicable to the petitioner; i) shall co-operate with the remaining investigation ii) shall not hamper or tamper with the evidence iii) shall not intimidate or harass the victim girl or informant or her family members. In case of violation of breach of any condition(s), the Public Prosecutor/informant would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of the bail. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed and disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant