Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010111932026 2026:GAU-AS:10323 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1215/2026 RAJIB BORA S/O- SRI ATUL BORA R/O- KAMARBONDHA, GOSAIN GAON P.O- KAMARBONDHA, P.S- GOLAGHAT DISTRICT- GOLAGHAT, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY P.P, ASSAM 2:XXXXXXXXXXX D/O- SHRI PRANJAL DUTTA R/O- KAMARBANDHA THANA TINI ALI GOLAGHAT ASSAM INDI Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M BISWAS, A GHOSAL,MS. A K CHOPHI,J SINGPHO Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. S DAS, AMICUS CURIAE(R2) B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER 28.07.2026 Heard Mr. M. Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and Mr. S. Das, Page No.# 2/3 learned Amicus Curiae for the respondent No.2/informant. 2. This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, whereby the petitioner, namely, Rajib Bora, has prayed for granting pre-arrest bail, apprehending arrest in connection with Sessions Spl. POCSO Case No. 89/2025 (corresponding to Golaghat P.S. Case No. 154/2025) u/s 376 of IPC r/w Section 9/10/11 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 and r/w Section 6/7 of POCSO Act, 2012, pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, POCSO, Golaghat. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present petitioner seeking anticipatory bail in this case is not the husband of the informant and is stated to be an acquaintance of the husband. He has also relied upon an order dated 02-02-2026 passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in AB/86/2026, contending that in similar circumstances, bail was granted. 4. The scanned copy of the TCR has been received. It appears from the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 Cr.P.C. that she has accused the present petitioners, along with others, of the commission of offences under Section 376 IPC/Section 6 of the POCSO Act. However, their names are conspicuous by their absence in the FIR lodged by the victim herself. Further, Page No.# 3/3 the allegation relates back to a period about 14 years back and having regard to the fact that the investigation of the case is already over, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary. 5. Accordingly, the prayer for pre-arrest bail is allowed. The interim pre-arrest bail dated 26.06.2026 is hereby made absolute on the same terms and conditions. JUDGE Comparing Assistant