Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010054612026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/323/2026 MD MESER ALI ALIAS BATAHU S/O SAHRAB ALI R/O VILL. SIMINA (DOKHIN SULIKATA) P.S. PALASHBARI DIST. KAMRUP ASSAM PIN 781128 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY PP ASSAM 2:MS NILIMA BIBI W/O ALTAF ALI R/O VILL. SIMINA (DOKHIN SULIKATA) P.S. PALASHBARI DIST. KAMRUP ASSAM 781128 ------------ Advocate for : MR. B D KONWAR SR. ADV. Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR ORDER 23.06.2026 (Mr. R. Mazumdar, J) Heard Mr. B.D. Konwar, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. M. Zomuanpuii, learned counsel for the applicant/appellant. Also heard Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned senior counsel and APP, Assam, appearing for the State and Mr. A. Dhar, learned Amicus Curiae, appearing for the respondent no.2. 2. This Interlocutory Application has been filed under Section 430 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for suspension of the execution of the sentence passed by the learned Additional Session Judge-cum-Special Judge (POCSO), Kamrup, Amingaon in Special POCSO Case No.36/21, sentencing the applicant/appellant to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 20 years and also to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 months. 3. The State has filed a written objection which is available on records. On a perusal of the records, it is seen that the informant had filed an FIR on 26.10.2019 alleging that her minor daughter had been subjected to penetrative sexual assault by the accused on 22.10.2019 at around 7 pm in the evening, while the informant was washing dishes at the backyard of her house. The delay in lodging the FIR was sought to be explained by stating that the same was caused since it took time for the husband of the applicant/appellant to reach his home after being informed about the incidents. Page No.# 3/5 4. Mr. B.D. Konwar, learned senior counsel has submitted that the contents of the FIR vary largely with the evidence led on behalf of the prosecution, and further, the husband of the informant in his evidence has stated that he had reached home within 30 minutes of the alleged incident. The learned senior counsel has further submitted that there is material to show that the alleged victim had been tutored to give evidence. There is also evidence to show that as per the evidence of the informant, they had offered money to the accused in exchange for land; however, such money was refused by the accused stating that the land was donated to the informant’s family. The learned senior counsel has further submitted that the medical report does not corroborate the allegation of sexual intercourse and even the injuries upon the victim may not have been due to penile penetration. He has further submitted that there are several contradictions in the evidence led by the prosecution and there was a fair chance of acquittal of the applicant/appellant in the present case. The learned senior counsel has further submitted that the applicant/appellant had been granted the privilege of bail during the trial and had fully cooperated during the trial. He further submits that there is little or no chance of the applicant/appellant absconding and that the applicant/appellant undertakes to abide by all conditions that may be imposed upon him in the event he is granted the privilege of bail during the pendency of the connected appeal. 5. Objecting to the prayer made on behalf of the applicant, the learned APP, Ms. B. Bhuyan, senior advocate has submitted that the minor victim has remained Page No.# 4/5 consistent in her evidence and it is settled position that, the evidence of a victim of sexual assault would carry enough weight, if trusworthy and reliable, to secure the conviction of an accused. She has referred to Judgement of the Apex Court rendered in Ganesan vs. State in Criminal Appeal No.680/2020 to buttress her submission. She has accordingly prayed that the applicant/appellant need not be granted the privilege of bail during the pendency of the connected appeal. 6. We have considered the submissions made and we have also perused the records. Without deciding the merits of the appeal at this stage, we are of the prima facie view that the applicant/appellant, who was on bail during the trial proceedings, without allegation of any misuse of such privilege, can be granted the privilege of bail in view of the projection made by the learned senior counsel appearing for the applicant/appellant. We make it clear that the prima facie view taken by us, while considering the grant of bail, will not affect the final adjudication of the connected appeal in any manner. Accordingly, the applicant/appellant, namely, Meser Ali @ Batahu is directed to be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. The learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to impose such other conditions on the applicant/appellant to ensure his surrender in the event the connected appeal fails. Consequently the sentence awarded to the applicant by the learned Additional Sessions Judge cum Special Judge (POCSO), Kamrup, Amingaon in relation to POCSO Case No.36/2021 Page No.# 5/5 under Section 6 of the POCSO Act is hereby suspended till further orders. 7. I.A. accordingly disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant