Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010016262025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./226/2025 ALTAP HUSSIAN @ ALTAF SK S/O LATE ABUL HUSSAIN, RESIDENT OF PUB MARAGADADHAR, PS TAMARHAT, DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP BY THE PP ASSAM 2:HAKIM ALI S/O LATE FOJOL HOQUE RESIDENT OF PUB MARAGADADHAR PS TAMARHAT PO PAGLAHAT DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM 78333 Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. R CHOUDHURY, MS. B. HAZARIKA,MD. MEMON AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MRS. S ROY (R-2) BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MALASRI NANDI ORDER Date : 21.03.2025 Heard Ms. R. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. S.H. Borah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State Page No.# 2/3 and Mrs. S. Roy, learned Amicus Curiae for the respondent No. 2. By this application filed under section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraskha Sanhita, 2023, the accused petitioner namely, Altap Hussain @ Altaf Sk, has prayed for bail in connection with Special Case No. 577/2024(arising out of Tamarhat P.S. Case No. 81/2024) under Section 61(2)/127(3)/329(4)/65(1) BNS r/w Section 6 of POCSO Act, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge cum Special Judge, POCSO, Dhubri. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the father of the main accused who is absconding since the date of incident. The petitioner has been detained in custody for last 6(six) months since his arrest on 21.09.2024. Though it is alleged that the petitioner being the father of the main accused, kidnapped the victim girl and locked the door from outside and his son committed rape on her. However, charge- sheet has been laid in the case as such, further custodial interrogation may not be required in this case. Considering the allegation against the petitioner as well as period of detention, bail may be considered to the petitioner. In response, Ms. Borah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State submits that length of detention of the petitioner may be considered. Ms. Roy, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 submits that the informant has no objection if the petitioner is released on bail. I have considered the submissions made by the parties. I have also perused the trial court record. It appears from the record that the prime accused i.e. son of the petitioner has been shown absconder in the charge sheet. The petitioner Page No.# 3/3 has been detained in custody for more than 6(six) months. The trial has not yet been commenced due to non-appearance of the co-accused. As the informant has no objection if the petitioner is released on bail as well as considering the length of detention of the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. In view of the above, the petitioner, named above, shall be released on bail in connection with Special Case No. 577/2024(arising out of Tamarhat P.S. Case No. 81/2024) under Section 61(2)/127(3)/329(4)/65(1) BNS r/w Section 6 of POCSO Act, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge cum Special Judge, POCSO, Dhubri, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/- with two suitable sureties of the like amount, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge cum Special Judge, POCSO, Dhubri, Assam. The direction for bail is further subject to the conditions that the petitioner: (a) shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of learned Additional Sessions Judge cum Special Judge, POCSO, Dhubri, Assam without prior written permission from him/her; (b) 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. In terms of the above, this bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant