Gauhati High Court
Bail Appln./1657/2026 of ARUP SHARMA Vs STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR on 7 September 2026
GAHC010111542026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1657/2026 ARUP SHARMA S/O PASAPANI SHARMA, VILL-MIRI PATHAR, GOMIRI, P.S.- HELEM, DIST- BISWANATH, ASSAM, PIN- 784170. VERSUS STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED
GAHC010111542026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./1657/2026
ARUP SHARMA
S/O PASAPANI SHARMA, VILL-MIRI PATHAR, GOMIRI, P.S.- HELEM, DIST- BISWANATH, ASSAM, PIN- 784170.
VERSUS
STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
REPRESENTED BY THE P.P., ASSAM
2:SMT BINA DEVI
W/O FANINDRA BORAL
VILL-MIRI PATHAR
GOMIRI
P.S.HELEM
DIST-BISWANATH
ASSAM 784170
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B CHAKRAVARTY, MS A BORDOLOI,A SARMA
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS. M K BROWN, Amicus Curiae, R2
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Date : 08.09.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State as well as Ms. M. K. Brown, learned Amicus Curiae for the respondent No. 2.
2. This is an application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, praying for grant of regular bail to the accused/petitioner, namely, Arup Sharma, in connection with Special POCSO Case No. 23/2026, arising out of Helem P.S. Case No. 04/2026, registered under Section 65(2) of the BNSS, 2023, read with Section 4(2) of the POCSO Act, 2012, which is in trial before the learned Special Judge, Biswanath at Biswanath Chariali.
3. The allegation against the accused/petitioner is that he committed penetrative sexual assault upon the victim, who is aged about 8 years old at the time of alleged offence by inserting his finger into her vegina.
4. Learned counsel for the accused/ petitioner submits that the trial has not made any progress since the last 2 months and only 4 (four) out of 15 (fifteen) witnesses have been examined so far and the accused/petitioner has been behind bar for more than 7 (seven) months.
5. Scanned copy of the TCR has been received.
6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, submits that the victim has implicated the accused/petitioner.
7. I have perused the evidence so far recorded.
8. It would not be appropriate to discuss in detail the evidence for the purpose of granting bail. However, it is pertinent to note that, the victim has not stated in her deposition that the accused/petitioner inserted his finger into her vagina.
9. In view of the above as well as the fact that the accused/
petitioner has been in custody for more than 7 (seven) months and the trial is likely to take some time to conclude and the accused/ petitioner is also required to effectively prepare his defence, I am of the view that the accused/ petitioner may be released on bail at this stage.
10. Accordingly, it is directed that the accused/ petitioner is allowed to go on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- with 2 (two) sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
11. As further conditions, the accused/petitioner shall cooperate with the remaining trial. Secondly, he shall not try to approach or influence any of the remaining witnesses.
12. Resultantly, the bail application stands allowed and disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant