Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010092682026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1242/2026 BIMAL BASUMATARY S/O LATE LUKAS BASUMATARY, R/O VILL DHUNABARI, PS HELEM, DIST BISWANATH, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM 2:LAKHINANDA BASUMATARY S/O GHANA BASUMATARY R/O VILL DHUNABARI PS HELEM DIST BISWANATH ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR SARFRAZ NAWAZ, MR. A TARAFDAR,MD A RAHMAN,A MISHRA,SAMIM RAHMAN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS. S NAZNEEN, AMICUS CURIAE R2 -BEFORE- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER 25.06.2026 Heard Mr. S. Nawaz, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also Page No.# 2/4 heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Addl. P.P appearing for the State and Ms. S. Nazneen, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the informant/respondent no.2. Invoking 483 BNSS, the accused/petitioner, herein, is seeking regular bail, who is arrested on 03.12.2025 in connection with Special (POCSO) Case No.06/2026, under Section 65(2) of BNS, 2023, read with Sections 6/13 of the POCSO Act, 2012, which is pending at the stage of trial before the Court of the learned Special Judge, Biswanath Chariali. The case arose out of Helen P.S. Case No. 82/2025, which was charge-sheeted vide C.S. No. 726 dated 31/1/2026. The petitioner was arrested on 03.12.2025 and since then, he is in detention and presently in judicial custody. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the meantime, the informant and minor victim stand, examined. Also drawing attention to the relevant paragraph of the bail petition, it is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated, due to some political reasons. In this context, attention is also drawn to the deposition of the informant as PW-1, in which there is a statement about village pressure for lodging the FIR. It is also submitted that the medical report does not indicate any injuries. I perused the deposition of PW-1 and also that of the alleged minor victim available in the scanned report. Mr. Sharma, the learned Addl. P.P. strongly objects to the grant Page No.# 3/4 of bail at this stage, contending that other witnesses remain to be examined. Ms. Nazneen, learned Amicus Curiae representing the informant submits that the testimony, the statement of the victim girl is consistent from the statement before Magistrate to her deposition during trial. Given my consideration to the matter, considering the fact that the informant and most importantly, the victim has been examined and also the length of detention of the petitioner since 03.12.2025 – I am of the considered view that perhaps he can be granted bail at this stage. In such view of the matter, the petitioner is allowed to go on bail of Rs.50,000/- with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Jurisdictional Court, subject to the following conditions:- (i) He shall be available for remaining trial, (ii) He shall not hamper or tamper with evidence. (iii) He shall not in any manner intimidate, harass, harm, or try to influence the informant/victim side or any witnesses. Violation of the bail condition will entail cancellation of the bail. Bail application stands allowed and disposed of. Send back the case diary. Page No.# 4/4 JUDGE Comparing Assistant