Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010052152025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./766/2025 FR JUSTIN RAJ RL C/O MAR INVANIOUS PUBLIC SCHOOL, HARMUTTY P.O. MERBIL,P.S.LALUK DIST.LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM PIN-784160 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REP BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:NIBEDON TOPPO S/O LATE SANTOSH TOPPO R/O IVLL-BISHRAMPUR P.O. JORIGURI P.S.LALUK DIST. LAKHIMPUR ASSAM PIN-78416 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B CHOWDHURY, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR SARFRAZ NAWAZ (AMICUS CURIAE, R2) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 22.07.2025 1. Heard Mr. B. Chowdhury, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Page No.# 2/4 Also heard Mr. P.S. Laskar, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1 as well as Mr. S. Nawaz, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the respondent No.2. 2. This application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Fr Justin Raj Rl., who has been detained behind the bars since 14.02.2025 (for the last 91 days) in connection with Special (POCSO) Case No. 23/2025 pending before the court of learned Special Judge (POCSO), North Lakhimpur, Lakhimpur in connection with Laluk PS Case No. 85/2024 under Sections 376(3) IPC, R/W Section 6 of POCSO Act. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that the father of the victim girl on 02.06.2024, lodged an FIR before the officer in-charge of Laluk PS inter alia, alleging that the petitioner, who is the Father/Manager of Mar Ivanios Public School has called the daughter of the informant to his room and subjected her to sexual intercourse. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the instant case the charge-sheet has been filed beyond the period of 60 days as amended under Section 193(2) of BNSS. He also submits that even the examination of the victim girl was also beyond the period as prescribed by the statute. Thus, the prosecution side has been intentionally delaying the progress of the trial. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the medical examination report of the victim girl nothing indicative of the fact that the victim was subjected to sexual intercourse is there. He also submits that due to prolonged incarceration the petitioner is getting difficulty in defending his case and therefore, he prays that the petitioner Page No.# 3/4 may be allowed go on bail subject to any condition which may be imposed by this Court. 5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner on the ground that the victim girl has categorically implicated the petitioner in the offence alleged against him. He further submits that some independent witnesses are yet to be examined and if he is released at this stage the said witness may be influenced by him. 6. Learned Amicus curiae appearing for the respondent No.2 has also vehemently opposed in granting bail to the petitioner at this stage submitting that the petitioner is not entitled to get the benefit of filing of the charge-sheet beyond the period prescribed under Section 193(2) of the BNS. He submits that in the instant case, the provision of Section 173,1(A) Cr.P.C. would be applicable. He also submits that out of total 11 witnesses, only 2 witnesses have been examined and 2 more witnesses appears to be student of the school of which the petitioner is the Father. Hence, there is every likelihood that if before their examination the petitioner is released he may attempt to influence the said witness. 7. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and have gone through the materials available on record including the scanned copy of the records of Special POCSO case No. 23/2025. It appears that the offence alleged in this case is a serious in nature where a student was subjected to physical intercourse by the teacher. It also appears that in the list of witnesses in the charge-sheet, two more students who appear to be the independent witnesses are yet to Page No.# 4/4 be examined. This Court is of the considered opinion that considering the nature of accusation made against the petitioner and the post which the petitioner is holding in the school of which the victim was student there is every possibility that if he is released on bail at this stage before examination of the listed witnesses namely, Miss Kalpane Subba, Smt. Maryan Moya as well Silvester Khalkho there may be every possibility of influencing the said witnesses. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. 8. Accordingly, this bail application stands disposed of. 9. However, an observation is made herein that after examination of the above three independent witnesses, the petitioner may approach before the trial court and file regular bail before the said court which may be considered by the trial court on its own merit. JUDGE Comparing Assistant