Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010027502025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/307/2025 SRI ALIM UDDIN S/O LATE NALU MANDAL, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE ADURIPARA, PS KACHUMARA, BARPETA, ASSAM, 781127 2: SRI ANWAR HUSSIAN WRONGLY NAMED AS ANAR HUSSAIN S/O ALIM UDDIN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE ADURIPARA PS KACHUMARA BARPETA ASSAM 3: SRI ABUL HUSSAIN S/O ALIM UDDIN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE ADURIPARA PS KACHUMARA BARPETA ASSAM 78112 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2:SRI HANIF ALI S/O LATE NALU MANDAL RESIDENT OF VILLAGE ADURIPARA PS KACHUMARA BARPETA ASSAM 78112 Advocate for the Petitioner : MS B LASKAR, MR N PATIRI Page No.# 2/4 Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS P DAS, Amicus Curiae(R-2),MR H A AHMED (R- 2) BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MALASRI NANDI ORDER Date : 02.04.2025 Heard Mr. N. Patiri, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. R.R. Kaushik, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. None appears for the respondent No. 2 on call. 2. By this petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the petitioners, namely, (i) Alim Uddin (ii) Anwar Hussain (iii) Abul Hussain, have prayed for granting pre-arrest bail, apprehending arrest in connection with Kachumara P.S. Case No. 005/2025 under Section 329(3), 65(1) and 3(5) of BNS, 2023 r/w Section 4 of POCSO Act, 2012. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that there is discrepancy in the FIR and the statement of the victim girl regarding alleged offence. As per FIR, the incident occurred in the house of the informant when his daughter was sleeping and accused petitioners had committed rape on her. But the victim stated before the Magistrate that the incident occurred when she went out in the morning hour for running. It is also submitted that there is a land dispute prevailing between the petitioners and the informant as a result of which, earlier also the informant lodged an FIR against the present petitioners along with some other persons. It is a false case as alleged against the petitioners. Under such backdrop, the Page No.# 3/4 benefit of pre-arrest bail may be extended to the petitioners. 4. On the other hand, Mr. Kaushik, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the case diary and submits that as the victim implicated only one person i.e. the petitioner No. 1 hence, he has no objection if the privilege of pre-arrest bail be extended to the petitioner Nos. 2 and 3. 5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. I have also perused the case diary including the statement of the victim girl. 6. It appears from the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of BNSS that on 25.01.2025 at around 4 a.m., while she went out for running to a nearby road, then the petitioner No. 1 (Alim Uddin) gagged her mouth and dragged her towards a field and had committed rape on her. When she came home then she informed the matter to her family members. The medical report also reveals that during examination of the victim, the Doctor found fresh tear suggestive of forceful vaginal penetration. Moreover, the school certificate of the victim girl shows that she was born on 01.01.2013 which transpires that the victim was around 12 years of age at the relevant time of the incident. 7. Situated thus, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of pre- arrest bail to the petitioner No. 1. However, this Court finds that custodial interrogation of the petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 is not required for the purpose of investigation of the case. Therefore, they are granted the privilege of pre- arrest bail. 8. Accordingly, it is provided that in the event of arrest of the petitioner Page No.# 4/4 Nos. 2 and 3 i.e. (ii) Anwar Hussain (iii) Abul Hussain, in connection with Kachumara P.S. Case No. 005/2025 under Section 329(3), 65(1) and 3(5) of BNS, 2023 r/w Section 4 of POCSO Act, 2012, they shall be released on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- each with a suitable surety each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the arresting authority. 9. The direction for pre-arrest bail is subject to the conditions that the petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 - (a) shall appear before the Investigating Police Officer within ten days from today and shall co-operate with the investigation; and (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. 10. The anticipatory bail application stands disposed of. 11. Return the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant