SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Gau) 726

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH 
Manash Ranjan Pathak, J.
Atabur Rahman S/o Late Jonab Ali - Petitioner 
Versus
The State of Assam, Represented By The Public Prosecutor and anr. – Respondents
AB/174/2025
Decided On : 26-03-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. M A Sheikh,
For the Respondent: PP, ASSAM, Ms. M K Brown, Amicus Curiae

Anticipatory bail cannot be granted in serious POCSO cases without considering the prima facie evidence against the accused and the severity of the charges.

Headnote:(A) Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Section 6 - Anticipatory bail application - Petitioner sought pre-arrest bail in connection with a case involving serious allegations of rape against a minor - The court emphasized that the prima facie case against the accused must be considered, along with the severity of the offence. (Paras 22, 27)

(B) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 438 - The court reiterated that anticipatory bail is not a blanket protection against arrest and should not exempt an accused from surrendering after charges are framed. (Paras 26, 28)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a charge-sheeted accused in a POCSO case, sought anticipatory bail, arguing that he was not an absconder and that his detention was unwarranted. The case involved serious allegations of rape against a minor girl, with evidence suggesting his involvement in the destruction of evidence. (Paras 2, 22, 27)

Findings of Court:
The court found that the petitioner was not entitled to anticipatory bail due to the serious nature of the allegations and the prima facie case against him. (Paras 28, 29)

Issues: The main issues included whether the petitioner could be considered an absconder and the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail in light of the serious charges. (Paras 22, 28)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the severity of the charges and the prima facie evidence against the petitioner warranted the denial of anticipatory bail, emphasizing that such bail should not be granted merely because custodial interrogation is not required. (Paras 27, 28)

Result: Pre-arrest bail application rejected.

ORDER :

Heard Mr. Mahammad Ali Sheikh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Bhaskar Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the State, opposite party No. 1. Also heard Ms. Manisha Karen Brown, learned Amicus Curiae for the informant, opposite party No. 2.

2. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner, namely, Atabur Rahman, son of late Jonab Ali, resident of Village – Sagunbari, Police Station – Moirabari, District – Morigaon, Assam, has filed this application on 27.01.2025 under Section 482 BNSS, seeking pre-arrest in Special (POCSO) Case No. 179/2024 arising out of Dhing Police Station Case No. 162/2024 registered under Sections 61(2)/ 126(2)/137(2)/74/70(2)/109/78 BNS read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act, corresponding to G.R. No. 2960/2024.

3. The Court on 30.01.2025 called for the scanned copy of said Special (POCSO) Case No. 179/2024 and also the copy of Dhing Police Station Case No. 162/2024 from the Court of learned Special Judge (POCSO) -cum- Additional Sessions Judge, Nagaon.

4. Perused the records of the case.

5. The petitioner is a charge-sheeted accused in Special (POCSO) Case No. 179/2024 arising out of Dhing P.S. Case No. 162/2024 under Sections 61(2)/126(2)/137(2)/74/70(2)/109/238 BNS read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act, pending before the Court of learned Special Judge (POCSO) -cum- Additional Sessions Judge, Nagaon.

6. As per the FIR dated 22.08.2024 lodged by the informant/opposite party No. 2, Sub-Inspector of Police, Dhing Police Station before the Officer-in-Charge of Dhing Police Station, the case is that on 22.08.2024 around 06:53 PM an information was received at Dhing Police Station from a person Abhishek Kumar Das through his Mobile Phone No. 9954339015 informing that a minor girl was found lying unconscious near the roadside at Borbheti Village, the road connecting Borbheti to Bhakatgaon, Dhing near Crematorium (Shib Mandir) under Dhing Police Station and it was suspected that the victim girl was raped by some unknown miscreants. Said information was accordingly recorded as Dhing Police Station G D Entry No 384 dated 22.08.2024 and the informant along with other police personnel including lady constable proceeded to the place of occurrence.

7. On reaching the place of occurrence it was found that the victim girl was lying in the lap of a woman belonging to Borbheti Village. Looking at the condition of the victim girl she was immediately moved to Dhing FRU (First Referral Unit) for her treatment. After her preliminary treatment, the Dhing FRU referred the victim girl to the Nagaon Medical College and Hospital wherein she was accordingly admitted for treatment.

8. In the place of occurrence, two young boys, Dipankar Nath and Surajit Nath of Borbheti Village were the first to witness and found the victim girl in a traumatized state and those two boys on questioning the victim girl could came to know that three miscreants conspired and followed her from the institution wherein she was taking tuition classes and when she reached the place of occurrence she was wrongfully restrained and was dragged to a roadside bush and they raped her. One of the miscreants had hold her hands, another put a handkerchief in her mouth so that she could not scream and the other miscreants pull down her pant and inner garments and committed rape on her. The miscreants also attempted to kill her in order to hide their identities, but could not do it because of the passing vehicles and as the miscreants got frightened, they fled away in the motorcycle.

9. The said information was given to those two boys by the victim herself, which they got it recorded in their mobile phones that was given with the said FIR.

10. As the victim girl was in the hospital for her treatment for which she was unable to lodge the FIR, in the interest of the investigation, the complainant opposite party No. 2 lodged the FIR so that the process of investigation starts without undue delay. Accordingly, the said FIR was lodged against the unknow

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top