Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010102702026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1379/2026 MD HANIF ALI SON OF UCHAMAN GANI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- SUNGLIBARI, GUTIBARI, P.S.-GINGIA, DIST.-BISWANATH, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, STATE OF ASSAM 2:DILJAN KHATUN WIFE OF MD. HANIF ALI DAUGHTER OF KHUSHID ALI PRESENTLY RESIDING AT VILLAGE- THAN BEHALI P.S.- BEHALI DISTRICT- BISWANATH ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : A B T HAQUE, MS. P DAS Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. M K SHARMA (R2) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA ORDER Date : 15.06.2026 Heard the learned counsel Mr. J I Borbhuiya appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. M P Goswami, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam as well as Mr. M K Sarma, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2. 2. This is an application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 in respect of Special (PoCSO) Case No.10/2026 pending in the Court of the learned Special Judge (PoCSO), Biswanath. Page No.# 2/2 4. The petitioner Md. Hanif Ali is an accused before the trial court and he prays for releasing him on bail 5. The petitioner Md. Hanif Ali was already married with two grown up daughters. After the demise of his first wife, he married the respondent No. 2. All of them stayed together. Thereafter, the respondent No.2 became mother of a girl child. The respondent No. 2 has alleged that on one occasion the petitioner had put his finger into the vagina and anus of her six year old daughter. The child was examined by the doctor. The doctor found that there are findings suggestive of trauma, which can be due to manipulation of the vagina and the perianal region. 6. Mr. Borbhuiya has submitted that the respondent No.2 was unhappy with the two daughters of the petitioner from his first marriage and therefore, she has been maintaining a disputing relationship with her husband. According to Mr. Borbhuiya the aforesaid case is a false case lodged by the disgruntling wife. 7. Mr. Goswami has objected to this bail application by referring to the findings of the doctor. 8. Mr. Sarma has also objected to this bail application on the same point. The respondent No.2 had already been examined in the trial court. I have gone through her evidence. 9. The petitioner has been in custody for more than 5 (five) months. 10. This Court is of the opinion that the petitioner no longer deserves to be detained in custody. Therefore, considering the age of the petitioner his bail application is allowed. 11. It is hereby directed that the petitioner Md. Hanif Ali, who is facing trial in Special (PoCSO) Case No.10/2026, shall be released on bail of ₹25,000/- with a surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge (PoCSO), Biswanath. 12. The petitioner is directed to appear regularly before the trial court on each and every date of hearing. If he fails to do so, the trial court shall have the liberty to procure his attendance in accordance with the procedures as laid down by law. It is further directed that the petitioner shall not contact the respondent No. 2 till the disposal of the case. With the aforesaid direction, the bail application stands disposed of accordingly. JUDGE Comparing Assistant