Page No.# 1/4 GAHC040013022025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : BA/94/2025 Smti Akom Yajum Dango Wife of Shri Akom Tayom Dango, permanent resident of Laigi Village, PO and PS Dumporijo, Upper Subansiri District, Arunachal Pradesh and presently residing at Itanagar, near IG Park, Itanagar, PO and PS Itanagar, Papum Pare District, Arunachal Pradesh. VERSUS The State of AP and Anr represented by the PP of AP 2:Miss Minom Chandra Mahato Age: 0 Occupation : resident of Goju Village under Bordumsa Circle PO and PS Bordumsa Changlang District Arunachal Pradesh Advocate for the Petitioner : Marto Kato, Yasmin Gao,Liya Keche,Tony Meto,Kamin Teri,Mepe Ete,Nyali Sora Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP, KeekeLoya Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BUDI HABUNG ORDER 17.09.2025 Heard Mr. M. Kato, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. T. Jini, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent No.1 and Mr. K. Loya, learned counsel for the respondent No.2/victim. 2. By filing this application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the petitioner, who is the mother of the accused, Akom Yomto Dango, has prayed for his release on bail, who has been arrested in connection with Itanagar WPS Case No. 44/2025 under Sections 64(f)/75/76/3(5) of BNS. 3. During the pendency of this bail application, the Investigating Officer has submitted the case into charge sheet against the accused for offences under Sections 64(2)(m)/75/76 of BNS, read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act. Since the offences against the accused are exclusively triable by the learned Special Judge, POCSO, the case is being tried by the Special Judge of POCSO, Yupia. 4. Mr. Kato, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the accused was arrested in connection with the above case on 30.06.2025, and has been in custody for more than 75 days. He further submits that the POCSO Act does not attract in the case as the alleged victim was a major at the time of commission of the alleged offence, as she was about 20 years, being born on 07.03.2003. He also pointed out that in the FIR, the informant/victim herself stated that she is 20 years old. In addition, Mr. Kato drew the Court’s attention to an affidavit filed by the victim, annexing her School Leaving Certificate and Aadhaar Card, Page No.# 3/4 both of which indicate that she is a major, having been born on 07.03.2003. He further submitted that since the investigation is complete, the charge sheet has been filed, and the trial has already commenced, the accused should be enlarged on bail to enable him to defend his case. 5. On the other hand, Ms. Jini, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, fairly submitted that in view of the documents on record, including the School Leaving Certificate and Aadhaar Card of the victim, it appears that the victim was a major at the time of the alleged incident, being born on 07.03.2003. Therefore, Section 6 of the POCSO Act is not attracted in this case. Moreover, under the JJ Act, an ossification test for age determination can only be ordered if the birth certificate, school leaving certificate, or equivalent certificate from the concerned examination board, and the birth certificate from the municipal corporation, are absent. However, this procedure has not been followed in the present case. Regarding bail, she submitted that since the charge sheet has already been submitted and the trial has commenced, she leaves the matter at the discretion of the Court. 6. Mr. Loya, learned counsel for respondent No. 2/victim, who filed the affidavit showing the age proof certificate of the victim made a similar submission. 7. From the above, it appears that the prosecution and the learned counsel for the respondent No.2 do not have any serious objection to the grant of bail to the accused, Akom Yomto Dango. 8. In view of the above, and considering that the case has already been charge-sheeted and the trial has commenced against the accused, and also taking into account the custodial period already undergone by the accused, this Page No.# 4/4 Court is of the opinion that the prayer for release of the accused can be considered in order to, enable him to defend his case from outside. 9. Accordingly, it is provided that on furnishing a bond of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand) only with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Yupia, the accused/petitioner, namely, Akom Yomto Dango, be enlarged on bail, subject to the following conditions: (i) that the petitioner shall appear before the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Yupia as and when the date is fixed; (ii) that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and (iii) that the petitioner shall not visit or contact the victim or any of her family members during the bail period. 10. In terms of above, this bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant