Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010054432025 2025:GAU-AS:4803 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./788/2025 MAHANANDA DAS S/O LATE JUGEN DAS RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BAHANA, P.S. HAJO, DIST. KAMRUP, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM 2:SRI DEBEN DAS SON OF LATE TARUN DAS RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BAHANA P.S. HAJO DIST. KAMRUP ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. U K BARMAN, MR. R KONWAR,MR. M MALAKAR,MR H ALI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS. M K BROWN, (AMICUS CURIAE, R2) BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 22-04-2025 Heard Mr. R. Konwar, the learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Page No.# 2/4 Mr. P. Borthakur, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State respondent no. 1 and Ms. M.K. Brown, the learned Amicus Curiae appearing on behalf of respondent no. 2. 2. This is an application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, with prayer for bail as the petitioner is behind bars since 23.01.2025 in connection with Hajo P.S. Case No. 31/2025 u/s 76/64(1)/351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 R/W Section 4(1) of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO). 3. Case Diary is received. Perused the same. 4. It is submitted by Mr. Konwar, the learned counsel for the petitioner that the present accused/petitioner is innocent and is no way connected with the alleged offence. However, he is in custody since last 89 days and hence considering his length of detention, he may be released on bail. Mr. Konwar further submitted that from the plain reading of the FIR itself it is seen that there is no ingredient which attracts Section 4 of the POCSO Act though it has been registered under the said section of law. However, the present accused/petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the I/O in further investigation of the case, if he is allowed to go on bail. 5. Mr. Borthakur, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that there are sufficient incriminating materials against the present accused/petitioner in the Case Diary, especially in the statement made by the victim u/s 183 BNSS and hence he raised objection by submitting that it is not a fit case to allow the accused/petitioner to go on bail. However, he submitted that on enquiry made by him it is submitted by the Investigating Officer that case is yet to be charge- sheeted and the case is still pending for investigation as the Investigating Page No.# 3/4 Officer could not collect the FSL report till date. 6. Ms. M.K. Brown, the learned Amicus Curiae for respondent no. 2 raised objection on the ground that considering the age gap between the victim and the accused/petitioner and also considering the statement made in the FIR as well as the statement made by the victim, it is not a fit case to allow the petitioner to go on bail. 7. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides, I have also perused the case record, it is an admitted fact that sufficient materials have been collected by the Investigating Officer and also it cannot be denied that the accused/petitioner is behind the bars for last 89 days and the Investigating Officer is not in a position to file chare-sheet within one or two days or within the statutory period. Without going into the merit of the case, only considering the length of detention already undergone by the accused/petitioner, it is found that the Investigating Officer has got considerable period for his custodial interrogation and I find that further custodial interrogation may not be necessary for further investigation of the case. Accordingly, I find it is a fit case to enlarge the accused/petitioner on bail. 8. Accordingly, the accused/petitioner is released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) only with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Kamrup, Amingaon. The accused/petitioner, namely Mahananda Das, be enlarged on bail, subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required; (ii) that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any Page No.# 4/4 inducement, threaten 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; and (iii) that the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Kamrup, Amingaon without prior permission. The Bail Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant