Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010259922025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3830/2025 DIPAK SARMAH @ SAIKIA S/O RATNESWAR SARMAH, R/O VILL LORIDANGA POLICE STATION- BIHPURIA , DISTRICT- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PP ASSAM 2:MOON BORA W/O BOLU BORA R/O LORIDANGA P.S.- BIHPURIA P.O.- DONGIBIL PIN 784161 DISTRICT- LAKHIMPUR ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P HAZARIKA, MS. B THAKURIA,P. BORAH,MR. H S BORAH Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS P DAS (AMICUS CURIAE, R-2) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER Date : 06-05-2026 Heard Mr. P. Hazarika, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. J Baruah, learned Addl. P.P appearing for the State and Ms. P. Das, learned Amicus Page No.# 2/3 curiae for the respondent No. 2/informant. This is an application under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 praying for granting regular bail to the accused/petitioner, namely Dipak Sarmah in connection with Special (POCSO) Case No. 124/2025 pending in the Court of the Special Judge (POCSO) Lakhimpur, North Lakhimpur arising out of Bihpuria P.S Case No. 110/2025 under Section 75 of the BNS, 2023 r/w section 10 of POCSO Act which after completion of the investigation resulted in Charge-sheet No. 103/2025 and pending at the stage of trial. It is contended and submitted from the petitioner side that the accused/petitioner is in custody since 28.05.2025 and during the course of the trial, both the victim and the informant have already been examined and the copies of the depositions have been annexed to the petition as well as the medical report. The scanned TCR have been received. The prosecution opposing the bail petition submits that the except one witness almost all other witnesses have been examined and there implications have been revealed from the prosecution evidence. The learned Amicus curiae for the informant/respondent No. 2 supporting the prosecution submits that the medical report also lends supports to the allegation and the victim girl is of a tender age about 11 years. As per the material, the accused at the time of the incident was stated to be 50 years old. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for several dates, the prosecution evidence has not been progressed. I have perused the deposition of the victim girl, her statement recorded during the investigation before the learned JMFC during the investigation. I have perused the medical report and the findings therein. Upon giving due consideration to the matter and also keeping in mind of the incriminating materials and the tender age of the victim girl and the fact that the trial is nearing its finality, the instant bail petition stands rejected at this stage. However, it Page No.# 3/3 is hope that the learned Trial Court will complete the remaining trial expeditiously. The bail petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant