Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010009132025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./168/2025 TAUFIQUE ALI @ MD TOFIQ ALI S/O BAHARUDDIN ALI R/O JAIMATI PATH,KABAROU GAON, P.S.GOLAGHAT, DIST. GOLAGHAT, ASSAM, VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REP BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:XXXX (VICTIM) D/O PUNYASHYAM BORA R/OAMCHANIA GAON KAMARBANDHA P.S. GOLAGHAT DIST. GOLAGHAT PIN-785625 IN THE STATE OF ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M BISWAS, S K DAS,A GHOSAL,J SINGPHO Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 19.02.2025 1. Heard Mr. M Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Page No.# 2/4 Mr. RJ Baruah, learned Addl. PP, appearing for respondent No.1 and Mr. A Dhar, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for respondent No.2. 2. This application under section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Taufique Ali @ M.D Tofiq Ali, who has been detained behind the bars since 15.11.2024 (for last 96 days) in connection with Session Special POCSO Case No.1/2025 corresponding to Golaghat PS Case No.232/2024 under section 332/74/75 BNS, 2023 read with section 8/9(c) of the POCSO Act, 2012. 3. The gist of accusations in this case is that on 14.11.2024, the victim girl, who is aged about 17 years, lodged an FIR before the officer in charge of Kamarbandha Police OP, inter-alia alleging that on that day at about 12.43 pm when she was alone in her house, the petitioner, who is a line man, came to her house and asked for a glass of water and thereafter pushed her inside the house and tried to do bad act. When she raised hue and cry the petitioner ran away there from. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the allegations leveled in the FIR are not true. He submits that the petitioner being a line man, went to check the meter in the house of the victim girl. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that there is an outstanding APDCL bill in the name of the grandfather of the victim girl, which is of more than Rs. 30,000/-. 5. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there was an altercation as regards the outstanding due and, therefore, to teach the petitioner a lesson, a false case has been filed against him. He further submits that the allegation against the petitioner in the FIR is only to the extent that he tried to commit bad act which itself implies that he was not successful in doing anything with the victim. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the Page No.# 3/4 petitioner is a government servant, however he has been detained behind the bars for last 96 days. He is ready to face trial and therefore he prays for allowing the petitioner to go on bail. 7. On the other hand, learned Addl. PP submits that the considering the nature of the offence, bail may be considered only after examination of the victim girl. 8. On the other hand, Mr. A Dhar, learned Amicus Curiae had also pointed out that though, in the FIR no mention about any other witness is there, however, in her statement recorded under section 183 of BNSS, the victim has mentioned about presence of a witness in her house when the alleged offence was committed. 9. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the sides. 10. Though this case involves offence under POCSO Act, 2012, however, the nature of offence which is alleged to have been committed by the present petitioner as well as the fact that the petitioner has been detained behind the bars for last 96 days are relevant. More over, the victim girl, who is a minor, is aged about more than 17 years, therefore, she may not be amenable to any influence by the petitioner even if he is released on bail. Further, if it can be ensured that the petitioner does not attempt to influence the witnesses while he remains on bail, there may not be any impediment to grant bail to the petitioner considering his long period of detention. 11. In view of the aforesaid reasons, the above named petitioner is allowed to go on bail of Rs.30,000/- with one surety of the like amount subject to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, POCSO, Golaghat with following conditions: i. That the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to the victim girl or to any of the listed Page No.# 4/4 witnesses so as to dissuade them from deposing against the petitioner in the trial; ii. The petitioner shall cooperate with the trial 12. If any of the bail conditions is violated by the petitioner, it may be a good ground for the Trial Court for sending the petitioner to custody under section 483 (3) of the BNSS, 2023. 13. With the above observation, the bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant