Gauhati High Court
AB/1514/2026 of MINHAJ ALI MOLLAH Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR on 1 September 2026
GAHC010132572026 2026:GAU-AS:12724 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1514/2026 MINHAJ ALI MOLLAH S/O- LATE ROSHNAI MOLLAH, VILL.- BOGULAMARI PART-I, P.S. GAURIPUR, DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED
GAHC010132572026
2026:GAU-AS:12724
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/1514/2026
MINHAJ ALI MOLLAH
S/O- LATE ROSHNAI MOLLAH, VILL.- BOGULAMARI PART-I, P.S.
GAURIPUR, DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
2:SAJAMAL SHEIKH
S/O- LATE JILAN SHEIKH
VILL.- BOGULAMARI PART-I
P.S. GAURIPUR
DIST. DHUBRI
ASSA
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R ALI, MR H A AHMED,N M ALI
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, B E F O R E
HON’BLE 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
02.09.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This is an application filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 for granting pre-arrest bail to the petitioner in connection with Gauripur P.S. Case No. 109/2026 under Sections 64(1)/69/115(1)/296/3(5) of the BNS, r/w Section 6 of the POCSO Act.
3. It is alleged against the petitioner in the FIR that he abducted the minor victim girl, kept her in his house for the whole night, and committed sexual intercourse with her, and the next day, the family members of the accused drove her out of the house.
4. A scanned copy of the TCR has been received and perused.
5. Upon perusal of the medical report, it appears that the victim was only 14 years old and physical injuries were found. Furthermore, the victim has squarely implicated the accused person in both her statements recorded before the police and the Magistrate.
6. Having regard to the nature and gravity of the allegations, the medical evidence, and the statements of the victim, the presentw is not found to be a fit case for grant of pre-arrest bail.
7. Accordingly, the prayer stands rejected.
8. The bail petition stands dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant