Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010057872025 2025:GAU-AS:4595 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./796/2025 KESHAB BORA ALIAS KESHAB BORAH S/O KUMUD BORA, RESIDENT OF BADHAKARA MAJGAON, PS NORTH LAKHIMPUR, DIST LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:PINKY DUTTA W/O LATE BOLO SAIKIA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE CHUTIAKARI RONGAPONIA PS NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST LAKHIMPUR ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MAHIBUR RAHMAN, MS. NISHA BEGUM,MS ASFIA AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. S RANA (R-2) Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER 10.04.2025 Heard Mr. M. Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent No.1 and Mr. S. Rana, learned counsel for the respondent No.2. This application under Section 483 of BNSS, praying for grant of bail to the accused/petitioner, who has been languishing in jail hazot since 08.03.2025 in connection with North Lakhimpur P. S. Case No. 82/2025, registered under Section 74 of BNS read with Section 8 of POCSO Act. It is submitted by Mr. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, that the case diary called for has not yet been received. In this regard, Mr. Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner, has submitted that the accused/petitioner has been behind bar since 08.03.2025, and the Investigating Officer (IO) got sufficient opportunity to interrogate the petitioner while keeping him in custody. He further submitted that the case is registered under Section 8 of the POCSO Act and based on the FIR and the forwarding report and considering the length of detention undergone by the accused/petitioner, he prays for his enlargement on bail. Furthermore, the petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the IO in the further investigation of the case, if allowed. On the other hand, Mr. Sharma, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, has submitted that the statement made in the FIR itself establishes a case under Section 8 of the POCSO Act. However, he is not in a position to comment on the merits of the case at present due to the non-availability of the case diary. Mr. Rana, learned counsel for respondent No. 2/informant, has submitted that Page No.# 3/3 the case diary may be called for to reveal the actual facts of the case. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels for both sides, without going into the merits of the case, and in light of the length of detention already undergone by the accused/petitioner (i.e., 43 days), I am of the view that the IO got ample opportunity to interrogate the accused/petitioner in custody. Accordingly, further custodial interrogation of the accused/petitioner does not appear necessary in this case Accordingly, it is provided that 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), North Lakhimpur, Lakhimpur, the accused/petitioner, namely, Keshab Bora @ Keshab Borah, 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 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; and (iii) that the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned Special Judge (POCSO), North Lakhimpur, Lakhimpur, without prior permission. In terms of above, this bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant