Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010178242025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/1115/2025 in Crl.A./386/2025 MONJUL ALI SON OF MD. ISHAK ALI R/O - BIHPURIA WARD NO. 1 P.S.AND P.O.-BIHPURIA DIST. - LAKIMPUR ASSAM PIN - 784161 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ASSAM 2:HALIMA BEGUM WIFE OF ALAUDDIN AHMED R/O - BIHPURIA WARD NO. 1 P.S.AND P.O.-BIHPURIA DIST. - LAKIMPUR ASSAM PIN - 784161. PRESENTLY RESIDING AT HALIMA BEGUM AGED 25 YEARS WIFE OF ALAUDDIN AHMED VILL.- MORNOI GAON OPPOSITE BHARAT GAS AGENCY PO AND PS - BIHPURIA DIST - LAKHIMPUR ASSAM PIN - 784161 ------------ Page No.# 2/3 Advocate for : Accaito Sarania Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 18.08.2026 (M. Zothankhuma, J) 1. Heard Mr. A. Sarania, learned counsel for the applicant/appellant and Mr. K. K. Das, learned Addl. PP, for the State as well as Ms. D. Musahary, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the respondent No. 2. 2. This is an application under Section 430 B.N.S.S. for suspending the sentence to be undergone by the applicant, pursuant to the conviction of the applicant, vide judgment dated 03.05.2025, passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Lakhimpur, North Lakhimpur, in Special POCSO Case No. 2 of 2022. 3. The counsel for the applicant submits that the conviction of the applicant, on the sole testimony of the victim, (PW-2), which is not corroborated by any medical evidence, could not be reason enough for convicting the applicant. Further, the learned Trial Court did not consider the major contradictions in the testimonies of the Prosecution Witness. Further, PW-1 having been declared a hostile witness, her evidence, which was in favour of the applicant, should have been considered by the learned Trial Court, which was not done. As such, the applicant should be granted bail and the sentence may be suspended. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsels for the respondents submit that the conviction of a person accused of sexual offense under the POCSO Act can be made on the sole evidence of the victim. There being no discrepancy in the statement of the witnesses and as the final date of hearing of the appeal has already been fixed on Page No.# 3/3 07.10.2026, the present application should be dismissed. 5. We have heard the learned counsels for the parties. 6. Today was fixed for hearing the main appeal. However, on the prayer made by the learned counsel for the applicant, the main appeal has been adjourned to 07.10.2026. 7. On considering the evidence and the fact situation, we are not inclined to allow the present application. The application is accordingly rejected. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant