Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010033602026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./248/2026 SAHARUL ALOM LASKAR SON OF LATE MOTIN LASKAR RESIDENT OF VILL- GOBINDAPUR PART-III, P.S. SILCHAR, DIST. CACHAR, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:APEARA BEGUM LASKAR W/O SAHARUL ISLAM LASKAR RESIDENT OF VILL- GOBINDAPUR PART-III P.S. SILCHAR DIST. CACHAR ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MS S S ZIA, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS N HASSAN (LEGAL AID COUNSEL FOR R-2) B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER 20.04.2026 Heard Ms. A. Rana, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P. Borthakur, Page No.# 2/3 learned Additional Public Prosecutor. Also heard Ms. N. Hassan, learned Legal Aid Counsel for respondent No. 2/informant. This is an application filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 for quashing of the FIR dated 13.01.2026, being Silchar P.S case No. 52/2026 u/s 4/21 POCSO Act corresponding to G.R case No. 77/2026 pending before the Learned Special Judge POCSO, Cachar and the impugned FIR dated 13.01.2026, being Silchar P.S case No. 52/2026 u/s 64/351(2)/3(5) BNS r/w 4/21 POCSO Act corresponding to G.R Case No.77/2026 pending before the Learned Special Judge, POCSO, Cachar. The factual matrix of the case is that the informant one Apeara Begum Laskar, the mother of the victim of the instant case lodged an FIR dated 13/01/2026 before the O/C Silchar PS alleging inter alia that at about 12.00 AM the accused Ruhul Amin Laskar entered her house illegally and committed rape upon her 16 years minor daughter who was found crying at her home at night while the accused fled and thereafter the informant on 26/11/2025 lodged an FIR narrating the said incident and after lodging the FIR on 26/11/2025 a village bichar was held and after the bichar the other accused persons who are the uncle of the main accused Ruhul Amin Laskar threatened the informant of dire consequences and asked her to settle the matter. Furthermore, they helped accused Ruhul Amin Laskar to flee away to Dubai. On receipt of the FIR a case u/s 64/351(2)/3(5) BNS r/w Sec 4/21 of POCSO Act 2012 was registered and investigation started. A perusal of the FIR along with the Case Diary indicates that, although it is stated that the informant had lodged an FIR dated 26.11.2025 regarding illegal house trespass, sexual assault, and rape upon the minor daughter of the Page No.# 3/3 informant committed by accused No. 1, Ruhul Amin Laskar, the same was not registered. Upon perusal of the FIR, it appears that there is no allegation of sexual assault or rape against the present petitioner, Saharul Alom Laskar. Hence, the offence u/s 4 of the POCSO Act does not appear to be attracted as against the present petitioner. However, there are clear allegations of threats having been issued by the present petitioner, along with the other co- accused persons, to the informant. It is stated that the accused persons, including the petitioner, are continuously threatening the informant, her minor children, and her husband over the phone and through the villagers, demanding that the informant withdraw the case. In view of the aforesaid clear allegations and having regard to the fact that the case is at the stage of investigation, I do not find it to be a fit case for the invocation of jurisdiction u/s 528 of the BNSS to quash the instant FIR. Hence, in view of the above, the present petition stands dismissed. Send back the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant