Gauhati High Court
Bail Appln./1976/2026 of MD JUNAB ALI Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR on 24 August 2026
GAHC010146072026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./1976/2026 MD JUNAB ALI SON OF LATE TURUT ZAMAL, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- BRAHMAPUTRA CHAPARI, P.S.-GINGIA, DIST.-BISWANATH, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010146072026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./1976/2026
MD JUNAB ALI
SON OF LATE TURUT ZAMAL, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- BRAHMAPUTRA
CHAPARI, P.S.-GINGIA, DIST.-BISWANATH, ASSAM.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, STATE OF ASSAM.
2:MD FOSIBOR ALI
SON OF ALI AHMOD
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- BRAHMAPUTRA CHAPARI
P.S.-GINGIA
DIST.-BISWANATH
ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : A B T HAQUE, MS. P DAS
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, S SAIKIA, Amicus Curiae, R2
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR
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 : 25.08.2026
1. Heard Mr. A.T.B. Haque, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. S.H. Bora, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State respondent No. 1 as well as Ms. S. Saikia, learned Amicus Curiae, appearing for the respondent No. 2.
2. This is an application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, praying for granting bail to the petitioner, who has been in judicial custody since Page No.# 2/2 10.10.2025 in connection with Special (POCSO) Case No. 89/2025 (corresponding to Gingia P.S. Case No. 120/2025), registered under Sections 137(2)/ 65(2) of the BNS, 2023 read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that three out of the four witnesses have been examined and only one witness is remained unexamined. Accordingly, he prayed that the privilege of bail may be granted to the petitioner.
4. The learned A.P.P. has submitted that the statement of the minor victim girl clearly indicates the allegation against the petitioner and since one of the witnesses is still remain unexamined, the prayer for bail may not be granted at this stage.
5. The learned Amicus Curiae submitted that the minor girl implicated the allegation against the petitioner and the trial would not require much time now to be completed. Therefore, prayer for bail may not be considered at this stage.
6. I have gone through the scanned copy of the TCR and the materials on record. At the present stage, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the bail petition is rejected at this stage.
7. Bail application is dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant