Page No.# 1/3 GAHC040010842025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : BA/82/2025 Abdulla Son of Jalil, resident of Village Govardhana, PO and PS Govardhana, Baksa District, Assam. VERSUS The State of AP represented by the PP of AP Advocate for the Petitioner : Nimcha Hondique, C Ering,Begi Taba Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 01-07-2025 Heard Ms. C. Ering, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. L. Hage, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Arunachal Pradesh. 2. This is an application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of bail to the accused person namely, Shri Motalab Ali, who was arrested on Page No.# 2/3 21.03.2025. 3. The fact of the case is that in pursuance of an FIR, dated 08.05.2019, lodged under Section 376 of the IPC read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act, in connection with Itanagar Women P.S. Case No. 29/2019, the accused person was arrested and was released on bail on 22.12.2022. Thereafter, the chargesheet was submitted, charges were framed and trial proceeded. During the trial when the witnesses were examined and accused did not appear on one day i.e. 18.03.2025, the learned Court of Special Judge, POCSO, Yupia, issued Non Bailable Warrant of Arrest (NBWA for short) against the accused, on the ground that the accused remained absent without any steps and the matter was again fixed on 29.05.2025 for production of the accused. 4. On 21.03.2025, an application was filed by the accused person for recalling/cancellation of the NBWA issued against the him for his nonappearance on 18.03.2025. The learned Court below, however, rejected the application on the ground that due to absence of the accused person, the trial of the case could not proceed and accordingly, the accused person was taken into custody. 5. The applicant has approached this Court by filing the instant bail application on behalf of the accused person under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 instead of filing a criminal revision petition, challenging the order dated 21.03.2025 and also without make the victim as a party respondent. 6. It is held by the Apex Court that in cases under POCSO Act, the victim is required to be made a party and should be heard at every stage. 7. Ms. C. Ering, learned counsel for the applicant prayed that she may be allowed to withdraw the instant applicant with a liberty to file an appropriate application, as per law. Page No.# 3/3 8. Prayer is allowed. 9. The bail application stands dismissed on withdrawal with a liberty as prayed for. JUDGE Comparing Assistant