Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010026872025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Linked Case : Bail Appln./391/2025 BIJOY BISWAS S/O LATE RABINDRA BISWAS R/O BANGABASTI P.S JAGIROAD DISTRICT MORIGAON ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REP BY THE PP ASSAM 2:SMTI. SUBHADRA DEKA W/O PARSHUTTAM DEKA R/O NO. 1 DUNGABORI P.S. JAGIROAD ASSAM PIN-782403 ------------ Advocate for : MR S M ABDULLAH P Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER 08.05.2025 Page No.# 2/4 1. Heard learned counsel Mr. S. M. Abdullah P for the petitioner Bijoy Biswas. 2. The petitioner has filed this application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with prayer for bail as he is behind bars since 27.09.2024 in connection with Jagiroad Police Station Case No. 187/2024 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1207/2024, under Sections 137(2)/142/64(2) (m)/3(5) of the BNS and (POCSO Case NO. 167/2024) read with Section 6 of POCSO Act. 3. Heard Mr. B. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent State and learned Amicus Curiae Ms. P. Das for the respondent No. 2. 4. The allegation against the petitioner is that he has committed rape on the minor victim 'X' who was 16 years old at the time of incident. It is submitted that the petitioner has been behind bars for 222 days. As the grounds of arrest has not been mentioned to the petitioner, the petitioner's right to personal liberty has been curtailed. It is further submitted that notice under Section 48 of the BNSS has not been served to the family members of the petitioner. A certified copy of the charge-sheet along with the notice under Section 47 of the BNSS has been submitted which reflects that the grounds of arrest were not properly communicated to the petitioner explaining the facts and circumstances under which he has been arrested in connection with the aforementioned case. 5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 has raised serious objection stating that charge-sheet has been laid against the petitioner on the basis of prima facie materials against him. The deposition of the witnesses clearly reveals that the petitioner is complicit. Nature of offence is serious. Page No.# 3/4 6. If the petitioner is enlarged on bail, trial may be adversely effected. The petitioner is not entitled to bail considering the gravity and the depravity of the offence. 7. I have considered the submissions at the Bar with circumspection. 8. I have scrutinized the Trial Court Records. It appears that the grounds of arrest have not been properly communicated to the petitioner in a manner understood by the petitioner. I have scrutinized the certified copies of the charge-sheet and notice under Section 47 of the BNSS which is marked as ‘X’ and will forma apart of the record. 9. I have also relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Prabir Purkayastha Vs. The State of NCT 2024 (8) SCC 254, wherein it has been observed that :- “ 27. Thus, there is no hesitation in the mind of this Court that the submission of the learned ASG that in a case of preventive detention, the grounds of detention need not be provided to a detention in writing is ex facie untenable in the eye of the law. *** *** *** *** 30. Furthermore, the provisions of Article 22(1) have already been interpreted by this Court in Pankaj Bansal laying down beyond the pale of doubt that the grounds of arrest must be communicated in writing to the person arrested of an offence at the earliest. Hence, the fervent plea of the learned ASG that there was no requirement under law to communicate the grounds of arrest in writing to the appellant-accused is noted to be rejected. “ 10. Considering all aspects and in view of my foregoing discussions, it appears that bail may be granted to the petitioner. In the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Prabir Purkayastha’s case (Supra), the petitioner is enlarged on bail. The petitioner shall be enlarged on bail of Rs. 50,000/- with a Page No.# 4/4 suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court, under the conditions that: (i) The petitioner shall co-operate with the trial and not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission till completion of trial, and (ii) The petitioner shall not exercise threats to the witnesses or try to influence them. 11. On breach of any of the bail conditions, the Court is at liberty to immediately cancel the bail granted to the petitioner. 12. In terms of the above observation, Bail Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant