Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010008702025 2025:GAU-AS:3658 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./190/2025 AKASH KURMI S/O DIPAK KURMI, VILL- SANGSUA VTC NO.2, P.S. PULIBAR DIST. JORHAT, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:XXXX D/O ROBIN BHUMIJ VILL-TIPAMIA HABIGAON P.O.PANJAN P.S. BORHOLA DIST.JORHAT ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : U U KHAN, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. P SAIKIA (AS LEGAL-AID-COUNSEL FOR R-2) Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY ORDER 28-03-2025 1. Heard Mr. U.U.Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. N Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor and Mr. P. Saikia, learned Legal Aid counsel for the respondent No.2. 2. By this application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, the petitioner, namely, Akash Kurmi , has prayed for granting him regular bail in connection with Sessions (Spl) Case No. 192/2024, pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, POCSO, Kamrup (M) arising out of Dispur P.S. Case No. 349/2024 registered under Sections 366/294 IPC read with Section 4 of the POCSO Act, wherein he was arrested on 25.04.2024 and since then he is in custody. 3. This court earlier vide order dated 04.06.2024 had rejected the bail of the petitioner during investigation. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. 5. Mr. P Saikia, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 2 has vehemently raised objection against the prayer of bail to the petitioner. 6. Perused the scanned copies of the record and considered the stage of trial. Out of seven witnesses, the vital witnesses including the victim have already been examined, cross-examined and discharged. Only the forensic expert as well as the I/O remain to be examined. This court has also perused the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. as well as her deposition before the court. Page No.# 3/4 Admittedly, she is minor just below 18 years and the accused was aged about 20 years when the offence was committed. 7. This court has also considered that though there is allegation of forceful sexual intercourse, however, at the same time she had also deposed that there has been a love affairs between them. 8. Be that as it may, considering the matter in its entirety, this court is of the opinion that further custody of the accused/ petitioner will not hamper the trial of the case. 9. Accordingly, it is provided that the petitioner named above shall be released on bail, in connection with the above noted case, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) only with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, POCSO, Kamrup (M) subject to the following conditions that:- i) The accused petitioner shall cooperate with the trial and shall not unnecessarily delay the trial; ii) The accused 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; iii) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, POCSO, Kamrup (M) without due permission from him; iv) The learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, POCSO, Kamrup (M) shall be at liberty to add any other condition as it may think and proper. Page No.# 4/4 10. The Bail Application stands disposed of. 11. While parting with the record, it is made clear that the observation made in this order shall not be treated as a comment on the merit of the case inasmuch as the consideration made in this order is only for the purpose of grant of bail. JUDGE Comparing Assistant