Gauhati High Court
AB/1610/2026 of SATNAM SINGH Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR on 2 September 2026
GAHC010143522026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1610/2026 SATNAM SINGH S/O PARAMJEET SINGH R/O VILL. PAKDIA HAKIM, P.S. BEHATA SANWAT, P.O. POWAYAN, DISTRICT SHAHJAHANPUR UTTAR PRADESH 242401. VERSUS THE STATE OF
GAHC010143522026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/1610/2026
SATNAM SINGH
S/O PARAMJEET SINGH
R/O VILL. PAKDIA HAKIM, P.S. BEHATA SANWAT, P.O. POWAYAN, DISTRICT
SHAHJAHANPUR UTTAR PRADESH 242401.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
2:BARNALI HAZARIKA DAS
W/O JAYANTA KUMAR DAS
R/O NABAMILAN PATH PUB SIBNAGAR PATH
MAGAZINE VIP ROAD
GUWAHATI
ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. FIRUZ KHAN, K. SUMI,Q. KIBA,MS D BARUAH,MR.
ABHIJIT MENA,MR U CHAUDHURY,MR. T K DAS,RHITUSHREE TALUKDAR
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS. K BARMAN(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
03.09.2026
Heard Mr. F. Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and Ms. K. Barman, learned counsel for the informant.
2. This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, whereby the petitioner, namely, Satnam Singh, has prayed for granting pre-arrest bail, apprehending arrest in connection with Dispur P.S. Case No. 47/2026 under Section 78/351(3)/115(2) of BNS, 2023 read with Section 6/10 of POCSO Act.
3. The allegations made herein is that the informant along with her family were residing in Melbourne, Australia where the petitioner was also residing and the petitioner used to commit physical relationship and sexual assault upon the three year old male child of the informant.
4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the allegation against the petitioner is false and fabricated. The allegation is made by the husband of the informant as he suspected illicit relationship between the informant and the petitioner.
5. The informant is represented by the learned counsel has filed an affidavit stating that her husband lodged the present FIR by forging her signature and she is a cancer patient who has no knowledge of the aforesaid case having been lodged against the present petitioner.
6. Having regard to the above, the prayer for present arrest bail is allowed.
7. Accordingly, it is provided that the petitioner, named above, in connection with above mentioned case, they shall be released on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- with a one suitable surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the arresting authority. The direction for bail is subject to the conditions that the petitioner:
(a) Shall appear before the Investigating Officer within a period of 15 days.
(b) Shall co-operate with the remaining investigation;
(c) Shall not hamper or tamper with the evidence of the case.
8. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed and disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant