Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010059692026 2026:GAU-AS:4286 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./858/2026 SRI MITHUN BAISHYA S/O SRI JITEN BAISHYA, R/O VILL KHUDRA DINGDINGI, PS AND DIST NALBARI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR SARFRAZ NAWAZ, A MISHRA,MD A RAHMAN,MS SURAYA RAHMAN,MR. SURAJIT DAS,MR A W AMAN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date : 25-03-2026 Heard Mr. S. Nawaz, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State respondent. 2. This is an application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Page No.# 2/3 Sanhita, 2023, with prayer for bail as the petitioner is behind bars since 11.07.2025 in connection with Sessions Case No. 76/2025 u/s 329(4)/75(2)/76 of BNS, 2023. 3. It is submitted by Mr. Nawaz, the learned counsel for the petitioner that the present accused/petitioner is in custody since last 8 months 16 days and till date no evidence has been recorded in the said proceeding. Mr. Nawaz further submitted that on the plain reading of the FIR itself it is seen that it is a case of outraging modesty of a woman. However, the charge has already been framed prior to 27.02.2026 but, the date of evidence is fixed on 20.05.2026 i.e. after 3 months after the date of order passed on 27.02.2026. However, he submitted that the petitioner is a permanent resident of his addressed locality and will appear before the learned Trial Court below as and when the case is fixed and there is no chance of absconding. 4. Mr. Borthakur, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor raised objection and submitted that his earlier bail application was rejected by the learned Sessions Judge, Nalbari considering the nature of case and also considering the fact that the evidence of the victim was not recorded till date. Mr. Borthakur accordingly insisted to call for the scanned copy of the TCR. 5. Hearing the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides, considering all aspects of the case, vis-à-vis the length of detention already undergone by the accused/petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that further custodial detention may not be required for the purpose of trial. In view of this, I find it a fit case to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 6. Accordingly, the accused/petitioner be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand) only with one surety of like amount to Page No.# 3/3 the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Nalbari. The accused/petitioner, namely Mithun Baishya, 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, threaten or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/them 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 Sessions Judge, Nalbari without prior permission. The Bail Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant