Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 9871 (GAU)

DR SELIX ALAM v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

Bail Appln./996/2025 · 2025-04-06

Susmita Phukan Khaund

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010064372025 2025:GAU-AS:4253 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./996/2025 DR SELIX ALAM S/O SAMSUL ALAM R/O MARGHERITA KALIBARI P.S.MARGHRITA DIST.TINSUKIA,ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P KATAKI, MS S BARPUJARI,MS. A LALA,MRS R BEGUM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER Date : 07-04-2025 Heard Mr. P. Kataki, learned counsel for the petitioner Dr. Selix Alam, who has filed this application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with prayer for bail as he is behind bars since 26.02.2025 in Page No.# 2/3 connection with Margherita Police Station Case No. 22/2025 under Section 127(2)/68(d)/351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. Heard Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam, who has raised serious objection stating that there are incriminating materials in the Case Diary against the petitioner. The statement of the victim under Section 183 of BNSS clearly implicates that the petitioner has committed sexual assault on the victim by administering some kind of sedatives and thereafter, he recorded obscene acts. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the relationship between the petitioner and the victim was consensual and the petitioner was willing to marry the victim but as the petitioner’s wife opposed their marriage, the petitioner could not marry the victim and the petitioner’s wife approached Gorkha Students’ Union, which resulted in this false case. 4. I have considered the submissions at the bar with circumspection. I have also scrutinized the Case Diary. Investigation has progressed substantially. The petitioner is willing to cooperate with the remaining part of investigation and to abide by any stringent bail conditions. It appears that bail may be granted to the petitioner. 5. Considering all aspects, the petitioner is enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with a suitable surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (M), Margherita under the conditions that :- (i) the petitioner shall not exercise threats to the witnesses and the victim; Page No.# 3/3 (ii) the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission. 6. On breach of any of the bail conditions, the jurisdictional Court/Eleka Magistrate is at liberty to cancel the bail granted to the petitioner. 7. In terms of the above observation, this Bail Application stands disposed of. 8. Send back the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant