Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010080952026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1123/2026 JASIM UDDIN LASKAR AND ANR S/O JALAL UDDIN, R/O VILL BAKRIHAWAR PART X, PO NORTH NARAINPUR, DIST HAILAKANDI, ASSAM, PIN 788801 2: ABU SALAM S/O SAMAS UDDIN R/O VILL SRIKONA PART I PO SRIKONA DIST CACHAR ASSAM PIN 78802 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M H LASKAR, MR. S ROY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER 15.07.2026 1. Heard Mr. S. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the accused petitioners as well as Mr. K. Baishya, learned Addl. P.P., Assam appearing for the State respondent. 2. This subsequent petition under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 has been Page No.# 2/3 filed by the accused-petitioners, namely, Jasim Uddin Laskar and Abu Salam, praying for grant of bail in connection with Badarpur P.S. Case No.64/2025 under Sections 127(2)/74/75/76/3(5) of the BNS Act. 3. The FIR has been lodged by the father of the alleged victim girl with the allegation that she boarded a bus which did not have other passengers and the driver and the handyman tried to molest and rape her. Later on, she was found in an unconscious state and rescued by people. 4. The learned counsel submitted that the petitioners having been arrested on 02.04.2025 have spent more than one year in custody and the case is at the stage of evidence. 5. The earlier bail petition was rejected by this Court vide order dated 08.12.2025 in BA/3740/2025. 6. Apart from the scanned TCR which is available an up to date status report has also been received, as called for. The same reveals that the victim has not yet been examined and the last dates for prosecution evidences were on 3-7- 2026 and 13.07.2026 respectively but no witnesses turned up. 7. Mr. Roy, learned counsel reiterates his contention that as the trial is getting delayed, the petitioner is in custody for more than a year, he may be allowed to go on bail at this stage. 8. From the scan TCR, I find that charge was framed on 6-8-2025. It is not disputed at the Bar that despite the Prosecution evidence being fixed on several dates in between after framing of charge, it has not been possible to commence the examination of prosecution witnesses, including the victim. 9. Considering the nature of the allegations, it was important that the important witnesses, especially the victim to be examined before granting bail to the accused. However, at the same time, due to the continued delay in the commencement of the trial, vis-a-vis the incarceration of the accused, the aspect of the principles underlying Article 21 also has to be seen. Page No.# 3/3 10. Taking a balanced view of the matter, I am of the considered view that the accused should be granted bail at this stage, subject however to suitable conditions. 11. Accordingly, it is provided that the accused petitioners, named above, shall be released on bail of Rs.50,000/- each with one suitable surety of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned concerned court subject to the following conditions that the petitioners: (a) shall not abscond; (b) shall not hamper or tamper with the evidence; (c) shall be available for the remaining trial; (d) shall not in any manner cause any harm or harassment or injury of any kind to the victim or her family members; (e) shall not try to influence witnesses Violation of the bail conditions will lead to cancellation of the bail. 12. The subsequent bail petition stands allowed and disposed of. 13. Return the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant