Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010050562026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/522/2026 SORIF KHAN S/O LOTIF KHAN R/O VILL- SATIPUR P.S. KAJALGAON, DIST. CHIRANG, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:HALIMA KHATUN W/O AMIR HUSSAIN R/O VILL- SATIPUR P.S. KAJALGAON DIST. CHIRANG ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A AHMED, MR A AHMED,MISS. P M AHMED,MR. M A CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS T PARASHAR BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER Date : 27.04.2026 Heard Mr. A. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. S. Page No.# 2/6 H. Borah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam and Ms. T. Parashar, learned Amicus Curiae representing respondent No.2. 2. This is an application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 whereby the petitioner, Sorif Khan is seeking Anticipatory Bail apprehending arrest in connection with an FIR, which is registered as Kajalgaon Police Station case No. 19/2026 registered under Sections 64/75/351(3) of BNS, 2023 read with Section 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012. 3. The brief facts of the case is that the informant of the case the informant lodged an ejahar on 08.02.2026 alleging inter alia that on 03.12.2025 at about 7.00 p.m the alleged accused person unlawfully entered into the informant’s residential house and taking advantage of no one at their house the accused petitioner forcefully committed sexual intercourse (rape) with the informant’s minor daughter. The alleged accused person threatened the victim dire consequences if she disclosed the incident to anyone. Similarly, again on 28.01.2026 at about 8.00 p.m while the alleged victim was returning home from Satipur Tiniali Market, the alleged accused person came in front of her and sexually abused her by touching her breast and other parts of her body and somehow the alleged victim managed to escape from the place of occurrence. After returning home she stated the entire incident to the informant who accordingly lodged the present case. 4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the present FIR which is lodged belatedly is nothing but a malicious counterblast to the preventive proceeding initiated by the petitioner against the informant’s family members. The petitioner, apprehending threast and breach of peace from the informant and her associates, had earlier filed a petition under Section 126 of the BNSS Page No.# 3/6 before the learned Executive Magistrate at Kajalgaon, District CHirang, which was duly verified and signed on 30.01.2026. In the said petition, the petitioner had specifically narrated the incidents that occurred on 24.01.2026 at about 10.00 p.m and again on 25.01.2026 at about 10.30 p.m, when the persons from the side of the informant allegedly trespassed into the residence of the petitoner, abused and threatened him and his family members with dire consequence, including threats to implicate him in false criminal cases. The said petition was filed bona fide seeking preventive action from the Executive Magistrate for maintaining peace and tranquillity. 5. It is further submitted that immediately after the institution of the aforesaid preventive proceeding, the present FIR came to be lodged by the informant alleging a serious offence against the petitioner. The timing of the FIR, coupled with the prior dispute and the pendency of the preventive proceeding, unmistakably indicates that the allegations have been falsely concocted and exaggerated with the sole intention of wreaking vengeance upon the petitioner. 6. It is further submitted that the actual incident was entirely different, inasmuch as there was a longstanding dispute between the two families. The younger sister of the petitoner’s wife had been subjected to outraging of her modesty by making obscene gestures and by holding her hands by Jamir Husasin, Saddan Husain, Saheb Ali and Somer Hussain who are the very same persons shown as the 2nd parties in the earlier complant petition along with the informant of the present case filed by the petitioner under Section 126 of the BNSS. In connection with the said incident, the wife of the petiotiner had also lodged a separate FIR before the concerned police Station on 09.02.2026 Page No.# 4/6 against the said Jamir Hussain, Saddam Hussain, Saheb Ali and Somer Hussain. However, in order to shield the real offenders and to create pressure upon the petitioner, the present FIR has been subsequently lodged by the informant alleging a completely different and fabricated story involving her minor daughter. It is further submitted that the said girl is not the biological daughter of the informant but her step-daughter, and the allegation appears to have been deliberately projected in the present form only to give the case a more serious colour and to falsely implicate the petitioner. It is pertinent to mention here that the informant earlier lodged another FIR on 12.09.2025 alleging the same offences against some other person. The entire sequence of events therefore clearly demonstrates that the present case has been maliciously instituted as a counterblast to the earlier complaint from the side of the petitioner, and the petitioner has been falsely implicated in a grave offence. 7. It is also stated that the husband of the informant had earlier been in judicial custody in connection with two cases i.e. Kajalgaon P.S. Case No.07/2026 registered under the POCSO Act, and another Kajalgaon P.S Case No.156/2025 under Section 329(4)/75(2)/296/118(2)/3(5) of BNS Act and therefore the family of the informant is well aware of the serious consequences and gravity attached to allegations under the POCSO Act. 8. On the other hand, learned Additional P.P. has submitted that the victim in her statement has clearly implicated the petitioner, and hence this is not a fit case for grant of pre-arrest bail. 9. I have duly considered the rival submissions. 10. Having regard to the fact that the FIR was lodged only on 08/02/2026 Page No.# 5/6 with regard to alleged offenses having been committed on 03/12/2025 and 28/01/2026, the contention regarding concoction appears to have a ring of truth to it upon a prima facie consideration, which is further fortified by the fact that there is a long history of litigation between the rival parties. Due to the belated lodging of the FIR, the medical report also does not come to the aid of the prosecution as far as the commission of the alleged offense is concerned. Moreover, none of the independent witnesses have stated to have seen the accused going to the house of the victim, although they are neighbours and some of the independent witnesses have outrightly stated that the present is a false case lodged by the informant whose husband is also behind bars in a POCSO/rape case. It is also noticed that some of the said independent witnesses have stated that CCTV cameras are available in the house of the informant, and the Investigating Officer had also asked the informant to provide the said CCTV footage, but the informant claimed that at the relevant point of time, the CCTV cameras were not functioning. 11. Having regard to the above, I am of the view that the present is a fit case for grant of pre-arrest bail. Accordingly, it is directed that the petitioner, Sorif Khan, in the event of his arrest in connection with the aforesaid case, shall be released on bail of ₹50,000/- with 1(one) security of like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Authority. 12. It is further provided that the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within a period of 10 (ten) days from today for the purpose of interrogation and that he shall not try to influence or intimidate the witnesses or tamper with the evidence in any manner. 13. Accordingly, the Anticipatory Bail petition is allowed and disposed of. Page No.# 6/6 14. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant