Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010077582026 2026:GAU-AS:7655 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/839/2026 HARESWAR KUMAR SON OF LT. PRANESWAR KUMAR RESIDENT OF SOUTH GANESH NAGAR, NILGIRI PATH, NEAR LAKSHMI TEMPLE, P.S. BASISTHA, DIST. KAMRUP (METRO), ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:REKHA HANDIQUE D/O LATE SUREN HANDIQUE RESIDENT OF ASSAM SECRETARIAT QTR NO. 05 BLOCK NO. 8 DISPUR LAST GATE BELGOLA BASISTHA ROAD HARIZON COLONY P.S. DISPUR DIST. KAMRUP (M) ASSAM PIN-781006 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M AHMED, MR A HAI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS A KHATUN(R2),MR. M ISLAM(R2) BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND Page No.# 2/3 ORDER 02.06.2026 1. Heard learned Senior Counsel Mr. R. C. Saikia for the petitioner Hareswar Kumar who has filed this application under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with prayer for pre-arrest bail as he is apprehending arrest in connection with Dispur P.S Case No. 202/2026 under Sections 74/75/76/78 of BNS r/w Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. 2. Heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent State and learned counsel Mr. M. Islam for the respondent No. 2. 3. The allegation against the petitioner is that he is the brother-in-law of the informant. He is an elderly person aged 52 years and he has been continuously harassing the minor victim ‘X’ who is only 14 years of age and related to him. The minor victim is his niece. He has been harassing the victim for 11/2 years. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 has submitted that he has no objection if the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail. 5. It is also submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the informant has no objection if the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail and thus the petitioner is entitled to bail. 6. It is submitted that the petitioner is booked under Section 6 of the POCSO Act but the allegation in the FIR reveals that the petitioner has been booked under Section 7 of the POCSO Act and if he is booked under Section 7 of the POCSO Act, he is entitled to bail. There is no allegation of penetrative sexual assault on the minor victim ‘X’ in the FIR. 7. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has raised serious objection stating that there are incriminating materials in the Case Diary against the petitioner. Page No.# 3/3 The statements of the victim and the statements of the witnesses clearly implicates the petitioner. 8. I have also scrutinized the Case Diary. Although the informant has no objection, it appears that investigation may be adversely effected if the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail. Investigation is still under progress. 9. Considering the nature of allegations, at this stage, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Petition with prayer for anticipatory bail stands rejected at this stage. 10. In terms of the above observation, this anticipatory bail application stands disposed of. 11. Send back the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant