Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010146782026 2026:GAU-AS:14685 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2142/2026 BABLU CHAKROBARTY S/O SANJAY CHAKROBARTY, RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO. 29, DAKKHIN GANESH NAGAR, HARGAURI PATH, NEAR SHIV MANDIR, P.S. BASISTHA, DISTRICT KAMRUP METRO, GUWAHATI, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM 2:RUNU DAS (INFORMANT) D/O LATE MANGALIYA DAS R/O DAKSHIN GANESH NAGAR HARGAURI PATH P.O. AND P.S. BASISTHA DISTRICT- KAMRUP METRO ASSAM PIN-781029 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. T DEURI, S SHARMA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, N K TONGCHANGYA(R2),MR A.K. HAJONG(R2),MR. S. K. CHAKMA(R2),MS. D GHOSH(R2) BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER Date : 01-10-2026 1. Heard learned Counsel Mr. T. Deuri for the petitioner Bablu Chakrobarty Page No.# 2/4 who has filed this application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 with prayer for bail as he is behind Bars since 18.09.2024 in connection with Sessions (Spl) Case No. 311/2024 arising out of Basistha PS Case No. 519/2024 under Sections 376 (1) (n) of the IPC r/w Section 6 of POCSO Act. 2. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has been behind bars for more than two years. It is further submitted that the FIR clearly depicts that the incident occurred in the month of April, whereas the FIR was lodged on 17.07.2024, which clearly reveals that the FIR had been fabricated. The earlier allegation that the petitioner had committed rape on the victim is not reliable as no FIR had been lodged against the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner admitted that he had a love relationship with the victim. 3. Learned Addl.Public Prosecutor Mr. B. Sarma has raised serious objections, stating that the petitioner is a habitual offender. Earlier, there is a case of serious offence against him and he has repeated the offence once more and thus he is not entitled to bail. The date of birth of the victim is 20.02.2009 which clearly reveals that the victim is a minor and she has been sexually assaulted by the petitioner. This cannot be considered to be a case of love relationship because the victim is a minor. 4. Learned counsel Ms. D. Ghosh appearing for the informant/respondent No. 2 has raised serious objections stating that the petitioner is 33 years old and he is a married man. The victim never had any love affair with the petitioner. This petition is liable to be rejected as no fresh grounds under change of circumstances has been mentioned in the subsequent bail application. The learned counsel has also raised serious objections, stating that the petitioner's wife and mother has been threatening the victim. The petitioner, on the other Page No.# 3/4 hand, is a habitual offender and he has already been charged in a similar offence being Session Special Case No.73/2021 which is pending against him. If the petitioner is enlarged on bail he will be a threat to the society as he is booked under two similar offences which are heinous in nature. It is also submitted that the petitioner resides in the neighbourhood and the victim and her mother had to flee as they felt threatened by the petitioner and his family members. The victim's father has passed away and her mother works as a house help. If the petitioner is enlarged on bail, the victim will be under threat. Learned counsel has also raised serious objection stating that the petitioner has taken the plea for bail on the ground that his wife is not well but in support thereof no medical document is furnished. 5. I have considered the submissions at the bar with circumspection. I have also considered the fact that the petitioner has been behind bars for two years. It is also submitted that the evidence of the victim has already been recorded. I have scrutinized the entire scanned copies of the trial court records. The petitioner has pledged that he will co-operate with the trial and abide by any stringent bail conditions if imposed upon him. 6.. In view of the foregoing discussions, it appears that the petitioner may be enlarged on bail. 7. The petitioner named above shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/- with two local sureties one being Government Surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court subject to the following conditions: I) The petitioner shall co-operate with the trial, ii) The petitioner shall not exercise any threats to the victim and Page No.# 4/4 her family members or try to influence them. iii) The petitioner shall refrain from such activities with which he is alleged, iv) The petitioner shall not go anywhere near the vicinity of the victim. 8. On breach of any of the above conditions, learned trial court is at liberty to cancel bail granted to the petitioner. 9. In terms of the above observations, the bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant