Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010200262026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2724/2026 ABZALUR RAHMAN SON OF ABU BAKKAR SIDDIQUE, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE ROUWARKUTI, P.S. DHUBRI, DISTRICT DHUBRI, ASSAM, PIN-783334. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:MOFAZZEL HOQUE SON OF JOYNAL SK. RESIDENT OF VILLAGE GHEWMARI P.O. TISTARPAR P.S. DHUBRI DISTRICT DHUBRI ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A K AHMED, MR. Y ALI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. N. ISLAM(R2),K RAHMAN(R2) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR ORDER 28.09.2026 Heard Mr. A. K. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R.R. Kaushik, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam and Mr. K. Rahman, learned counsel representing the informant. Page No.# 2/2 [2]. This is an application filed under Section 483, BNSS praying for grant of regular bail to the accused/petitioner, namely, Abzalur Rahman, who was arrested on 31.08.2026, by the Trial Court in Special POCSO Case No. 162/2026. [3]. By order dated 17.09.2026, this Court had granted an interim bail to the petitioner on the following terms and conditions: “9. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner was enjoying the privilege of a pre-arrest bail during the investigation and further he had appeared on the fixed date to evidence his intention to participate and cooperate in the trial proceedings, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner namely, Abzalur Rahman (23 years), can be released on interim bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, POCSO, Dhubri, till final consideration of this Bail Application. Ordered accordingly.” [4]. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been granted bail and today i.e. 28.09.2026, a date has been fixed by the learned trial Court for framing of charges. Although the charges have not been framed, a statement has been made that the petitioner has appeared before the learned trial Court and is continuing to participate in the trial proceedings accordingly. [5]. In view of the observations already made in the order dated 17.09.2026 and the fact that the petitioner is cooperating with the trial proceedings, the interim protection granted on 17.09.2026 by this Court is made absolute, subject to the condition that the petitioner herein would continue to participate in the trial proceedings and not cause any delay or abscond. [6]. In the event, the learned trial Court finds that the petitioner is causing hindrance and avoiding trial, the learned trial Court would be at liberty to recall the privilege of the bail granted. [7]. With the above, the present bail application is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant