Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010061792026 2026:GAU-AS:7117 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./452/2026 NAZIMUL HAQUE SON OF AMINUL RAHMAN RESIDENT OF VILL- MATESAGRAM, PUBTIYAMARI, P.S- GAURIPUR, DIST- DHUBRI, ASSAM PIN- 783301 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM 2:SMTI KALPANA DAS WIFE OF LATE GHANASYAM DAS R.O- BALIGAON BALIPARA P.S- CHARIDUAR DIST- SONITPUR ASSAM PIN- 784001 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R DE, MR. R B SAH,MS. D PATHAK Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. SARFRAZ NAWAZ, AMICUS CURIAE (R-2) BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER Date : 22.05.2026 1. Learned Counsel Mr. R.De is present for the petitioner and Mr. S. Nawaz, learned Amicus Curiae is present for the respondent No.2. Mr. R.J.Baruah, learned Addl.Public Prosecutor is present for the respondent State. Page No.# 2/3 2. I have considered the submissions at the Bar. 3. The petitioner, Nazimul Haque has filed this application under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023, as he is aggrieved by the order dated 18.06.2024 in Special Case (POCSO) No.14/2023 passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Sonitpur, Tezpur, issuing non-bailable warrant of arrest against the petitioner and also issuing notice against the bailors. 4. The case of the petitioner is that he posed as Hindu and he induced the minor victim to have physical relationship with him and also provided a pregnancy kit to test her pregnancy. The guardian of the minor victim discovered and an FIR was lodged against the petitioner and finally charge sheet was laid against him being CS No. 173 / 2022 under section 376 of the IPC r/w section 4 of the POCSO Act. The petitioner who used to work in Kerala was unable to appear before the trial court during the pendency of the trial and finally NBWA was issued against him by order dated 06.11.2025. Notices to the bailors of the petitioner were also issued. Petitioner has prayed to quash the impugned order dated 06.11.2025 passed by the learned trial court as the petitioner is willing to appear before the learned trial court and co- operate with the trial. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner was in Kerala and was working as labourer and thereby failed to appear during the pendency of the trial. 5. The petitioner has defaulted in appearing before the learned trial court and the learned Additional P.P. has thereby raised serious objection stating that the trial was procrastinated by the conduct of the petitioner. The petitioner's conduct appears to be doubtful and he may jump the bail in the near future Page No.# 3/3 which may affect the trial and procrastinate the trial. 6. I have taken a pragmatic view. The petitioner is willing to co-operate with the trial and so he approached this Court with prayer to quash the impugned order and thereby considering all aspects, I deem it appropriate to keep the NBWA issued against the petitioner in abeyance for 15 days and the petitioner is thereby directed to appear before the learned trial court within these 15 days and co-operate with the trial. 7. In terms of the above, the criminal petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant