GAHC010010862025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : Bail Appln./160/2025 SRI SANKAR DAS S/O DIMBESWAR DAS, R/O VILLAGE JILKAPARA, P.O. BORKOLHA, P.S.

KALAIGAON, DISTRICT DARRANG, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR.

REP BY THE PP, ASSAM

2:TAPAN BANIA S/O LATE MAHENDRA BANIA R/O VILL- GERIMARI BIDYANAGAR P.S. MANDALDAI DIST. DARRANG ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S BORTHAKUR, MR SAURADEEP DEY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. U S BORA (R-2)

BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA

ORDER

Date : 05-04-2025 Heard Mr. D. Gogoi, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. S.

Borthakur, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R.J. Baruah, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent no. 1 and Mr. H. Mazumder, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. U.S. Bora, the learned counsel for respondent no. 2.

2. This is an application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying for bail to the accused/petitioner, who has been languishing in jail hazot since 27.11.2024 in connection with Mangaldoi P.S. Case No. 156/2020 u/s 366 IPC.

3. The scanned copy of the case record has already been received and perused the same

4. It is stated by Mr. Gogoi that both the accused/petitioner and the victim had love affairs and out of love affairs they eloped and thereafter the FIR was lodged by the father of the victim. He was not aware of lodging of the FIR and police did not search for him during investigation but subsequently he came to know that he was shown as an absconder in the charge-sheet. But, the learned Trial Court below has issued NBWA on the very first day after the case being transferred i.e. on 16.03.2022 the NBWA was issued against the present petitioner and no summons was issued to the present petitioner. He further submitted that the police have no authority to declare any person as an absconder but the learned Sessions Judge without considering the said fact had issued the NBWA on the very first day. On the strength of that NBWA, the petitioner got arrested in connection with this case and he is in custody since 130 days. So considering his period of detention he may be enlarged on bail. Further Mr. Gogoi submitted that the girl was admittedly more than 17 years at the time of incident and there is no medical evidence against the present accused/petitioner as no injury was found at the private parts of the victim at the time of incident. Further Mr. Gogoi submitted that the girl is presently of 22 years of age and talk of marriage is going on between the petitioner and the victim. Further he submitted that further custodial detention may not be required at this stage. He will regularly appear before the learned Trial Court below as and when the date is fixed, if his prayer for bail is considered.

5. Mr. Baruah, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted in this regard that the charge has already been framed on 04.02.2025 and the witnesses including the victim is yet to be examined in connection with this case. Further, he submitted that as per the statement of the victim recorded u/s 183 Cr.PC, the physical relationship was forceful though she admitted that they have love relationship with each other. Accordingly, Mr. Baruah raised objection and submitted that till recording of the evidence of the victim, his bail prayer may not be considered.

6. Mr. H. Mazumder, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no. 2 submitted in this regard that the trial is yet to be commenced and there should not be any hampering or tampering with the evidences if the bail prayer of the present petitioner is considered. However, he submitted that as per the instruction there is talk of marriage between the petitioner and the victim is going on and admittedly at present the victim is a major girl.

7. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of this case