Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010113382026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1518/2026 RAFIQUL ALOM S/O AZIZUL HOQUE R/O VILL ALOPATICHAR, PS ALOPATICHAR, DIST BARPETA, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR D MEDHI, MR K THAKUR,MR. A HUDA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS. D BORA(INFORMANT) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER Date : 13.08.2026 Heard Mr. D. Medhi, learned counsel appearing for the accused-applicant. Also heard Mr. M.P. Goswami, learned Addl. P.P. for the State as well as Ms. D. Bora, learned counsel appearing for the informant. 2. This is an application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, praying for grant of Page No.# 2/3 bail to the accused-applicant in connection with Sessions Case No. 73/2026, arising out of Hatigaon P.S. Case No. 126/2025, registered under Sections 140(3)/304(2)/64(1) of the BNS, 2023. 3. Ms. Borah, learned counsel appearing for the informant, submits that she has been instructed not to appear in the instant case anymore. 4. An FIR was lodged on 17.06.2025 by the informant, raising allegation, inter alia, that she was called by an unknown person on a mobile number to discuss about certain work. It is alleged that thereafter, she was picked up by three unknown persons in a white car and travelled through various places, viz. Rajdhani Masjid, Sijubari Chariali, Khanka, Lokhra, Jalukbari Boko and Dharapur and during that time, she was forcibly injected something. It is alleged that thereafter, she was raped by the accused- applicant and other co-accused present in the vehicle. It is alleged that thereafter, she was forced to call her brother to send some money, amounting to Rs. 20,000/-, and the same was paid to Sohidul Islam, one of the co-accused in the instant case. 5. On the basis of the FIR, police registered Hatigaon P.S. Case No. 126/2025. After investigation, police filed the charge-sheet and the matter is now pending in the evidence stage. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the accused-applicant submits that allegations made in the FIR are false and fabricated and no case of abduction is made out in the instant case. He submits that the FIR was filed belatedly after the incident and the victim had refused to undergo the medical examination also. He submits that no eye witness is involved in the instant case, as well as nobody has been examined till date, and therefore, the accused applicant should be granted bail. 7. TCR in the instant case has been received. Page No.# 3/3 8. The learned Addl. P.P., submits that there are sufficient incriminating materials against the accused-applicant involved in the offence so narrated in the FIR and therefore, he opposes the prayer of bail. 9. It is seen that charges in the instant case have been framed on 19.06.2026 and date has been fixed for appearance. It is also seen that only four witnesses have been named in the charge-sheet. 10. Keeping in view that charges have already been framed and trial has already begun, this court is not inclined to grant any bail at this stage, as the trial is expected to be concluded soon. Accordingly, the instant bail application is rejected. JUDGE Comparing Assistant