Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010016702025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/188/2025 MUSAROF KHAN S/O NURUL AMIN KHAN VILL-NO.2 GORAIMARI P.O. ALUKHUNDA, P.S.PANBARI DIST. CHIRANG, ASSAM PIN-783391 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:ABDULLAH BEPARI S/O LATETAPJALBEPARI VILL- KURSHAMARI P.O. PATILADAHA P.S. MANIKPUR DIST.BONGAIGAON ASSAM PIN-783391 MOBILE NO. 882286020 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M K HUSSAIN, MR. M ALOM,MS. F H AHMED,MRS. S Y AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, A SAHA (R2),MR. B J MUKHERJEE (R2) Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 24.02.2025 1. Heard Mr. M.K. Hussain, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sarmah, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam, as well as Mr. B.J. Mukherjee, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2/informant. 2. This application under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Musarof Khan, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Manikpur P.S. Case No. 12/2025, under Section 61(2)/137(2)/64 of BNS read with Section 4 of the POCSO Act. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 17.01.2025, the father of the victim girl had lodged an FIR before the Officer-In-Charge of Manikpur Police Station, inter-alia, alleging that the accused persons named in the FIR, including the present petitioner had conspired and kidnapped the daughter of the informant by deceiving her. It is further alleged that the accused No. 1, named in the FIR “Sah Alom Sk.“ had forcibly committed rape on victim rape. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence under the POCSO Act. He further submits that he has been implicated on this case only because the main accused, accused No. 1 is known to the present petitioner. Page No.# 3/4 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that in the meanwhile, the main accused “Sah Alom Sk.“, has already been arrested. He further submits that the petitioner is ready to cooperate in the investigation. 6. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the Case Diary of Manikpur P.S. Case No. 12/2025, and has opposed the grant of bail on the ground that there are materials against the present petitioner in the Case Diary. 7. On the other hand, Mr. B.J. Mukherjee, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2/informant has submitted that the accusation against the present petitioner is only regarding his role in conspiracy to kidnap the victim girl and no accusation of any sexual offence has been made against him. 8. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the sides and have perused the Case Diary, which is available before this Court. On perusal of the materials available on record, including the statement of the victim girl recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023, it appears that the main accusation of subjecting the victim girl to physical intercourse is against the accused No. 1, “Sah Alom Sk.“. The present petitioner has not been implicated by the victim girl in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023. 9. In view of the above, as the petitioner is ready to cooperate in the investigation, this anticipatory bail application is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to appear before the Investigating Officer of Page No.# 4/4 Manikpur P.S. Case No. 12/20252, within a period of 7(seven) days from the date of this order and co-operate in the investigation. If he does so within the stipulated period of time, in the event of his arrest in the aforesaid case, he shall be allowed to go on interim bail of Rs. 30,000/- with a suitable surety of like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the arresting authority with following conditions that:- (i) the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Police Officer within 7(seven) days from the date of this order and shall co- operate with the investigation; and (ii) the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to the informant or to any other persons who may be acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts before the Investigating Officer or to any Court. 10. This anticipatory bail application is accordingly disposed of. 11. Send back the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant