Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010084102026 2026:GAU-AS:8486 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1137/2026 UTPAL DAS ALIAS POL S/O LATE ARUN DAS, R/O MITONGPAR, P.S. GAURISAGAR, DIST. SIVASAGAR. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM. 2:MRS DIPALI GOWALA W/O SRI ANANTA GOWALA R/O MITONGPAR P.O. GAURISAGAR DIST. SIVASAGAR ASSAM PIN 78566 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S BORTHAKUR, MR. D GOGOI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR SAURADEEP DEY (R-2) Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER 15-06-20 26 Heard Mr. S. Borthakur, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. D. Gogoi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. K. K. Parashar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the respondent No.1. Also heard Mr. S. Dey, learned counsel for the informant/respondent No.2. 2. This is an application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, praying for grant of bail to the accused/petitioner, namely, Sri Utpal Das @ Pol in connection with Special POCSO Case No.25/2025 arising out of Gaurisagar P.S. Case No. 03/2025 under Section 65(1) of BNS, 2023, read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act. 3. Scanned copy of the TCR has already been received. Perused the same. 4. It is submitted by Mr. Borthakur, learned Senior Counsel that the present petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any such offence as alleged in the FIR. The petitioner got arrested in connection with this case on 22.03.2025 and since last more than one year, he is behind the bar. At present the trial has already initiated and two witnesses already examined including the victim and the informant the case. 5. He further submitted that initially in the FIR there is no utterance about the present petitioner and her statement was also recorded on 11.03.2025, wherein she did not brought any allegation against the present petitioner, however, in her subsequent statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS on 18.03.2025, wherein she brought some allegation of sexual assault on her by the present petitioner. Thus, he submitted that two trials are going on in the present case, wherein she named another accused initially and subsequently she also brought the allegation Page No.# 3/5 against the present petitioner. 6. However, the present petitioner is a permanent resident of his addressed locality and there is no chance of his absconding, if he granted with the privilege of bail, rather, he will regularly appear before the learned Trial Court as and when the date is fixed by the Court. 7. Further, he submitted that as the victim and the informant, the vital witnesses of the prosecution has already been examined, the question of hampering or tempering with the evidence of the other witnesses also does not arise at this stage. 8. Mr. Parashar, learned APP submitted in this regard that the victim is a 13/14 years old girl and she implicated both the accused persons, including the present petitioner stating that both the accused persons including the present petitioner had sexually assaulted her. 9. He further submitted that the evidences of the victim as well as the informant is recorded, but there are some other independent witnesses, who are yet to be examined by the prosecution and hence, he raised objection in allowing the petitioner to go on bail at this stage. 10. Mr. Dey, learned counsel for the informant submitted in this regard that it was a consensual relationship between the victim and the accused petitioner and hence, as per his instruction, the informant/respondent No.2 has no objection, if the petitioner is allowed to go on bail. 11. Mr. Parashar, learned APP further submitted that the informant is the mother of the victim and on her behalf she made a compromise, but the victim may not be aware about the compromise and some time it may also be dangerous for the victim, if the petitioner is released on bail. Page No.# 4/5 12. Heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and I have also perused the scanned copy of the TCR including the statement of the victim under Section 183 BNSS. From the record, it reveals that her statement is recorded on two occasion, wherein she implicated the petitioner in her subsequent statement and her from her evidence also it is seen that she implicated both the accused persons including the present petitioner. 13. However, it is seen that the statement of the victim as well as the informant has already been recorded and thus, the question of tempering with the evidences of other vital witnesses may not arise at this stage. Apart from that, as per the submission made by the learned counsel for the informant admittedly the relationship was consensual and hence the informant has no objection, if the present petitioner is allowed to go on bail. 14. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties without going into the detail merit of the case and also considering the fact that the victim and the informant has already been examined, this Court is of the opinion that the present petitioner may be provided with the privilege of bail. 15. Accordingly, the accused/petitioner, namely, Sri Utpal Das @ Pol be released on bail in connection with Special POCSO Case No.25/2025 arising out of Gaurisagar P.S. Case No. 03/2025 under Section 65(1) of BNS, 2023, read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act on furnishing a bond of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) only with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, POCSO, Sivasagar subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the petitioner shall appear before the Court of learned Special Judge, POCSO, Sivasagar, on each and every date to be fixed by the Court; (ii) that the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the Page No.# 5/5 facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) that the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned Special Judge, POCSO, Sivasagar, without prior permission. 16. With the above observation and direction, this bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant