Gauhati High Court
Bail Appln./921/2026 of MD ISHFAQUR JAHAN ALI Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR on 20 August 2026
GAHC010064792026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./921/2026 MD ISHFAQUR JAHAN ALI SON OF SHAH JAHAN ALI R/O JENGONI KOTIA, SIVASAGAR P.O., P.S. AND DIST. SIVASAGAR, ASSAM, PIN-785640 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM
GAHC010064792026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./921/2026
MD ISHFAQUR JAHAN ALI
SON OF SHAH JAHAN ALI
R/O JENGONI KOTIA, SIVASAGAR P.O., P.S. AND DIST. SIVASAGAR, ASSAM, PIN-785640
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
REP BY THE PP, ASSAM
2:SMTI. FIZA ISLAM BORAH
D/O TOUFIQ ISLAM BORAH
R/O DR. MI BORAH PATH SIVASAGAR
ASSAM PIN-78564
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P KATAKI, MS N KASHYAP,MS. A LALA,MRS R BEGUM
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. D GOGOI (R2),MR. U S BORA (R2)
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN
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
21.08.2026
Heard Mr. P. Kataki, learned senior counsel, assisted by Ms. R. Begum, learned counsel for the accused; Mr. D.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, being respondent No. 1; and Mr. U.S. Bora, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2.
2. This application, under Section 483 of the BNSS, is preferred by accused, namely Md. Ishfaqur Jahan Ali, who has been languishing in jail hazot, since 20.02.2026, in connection with the Sivasagar PS Case No. 31/2026, under Section 64/62/75 of the BNS, read with Section 12 of the POCSO Act, for granting bail.
3. It is to be noted here that the aforementioned case has been registered on the basis of one FIR lodged by one Rehena Bora Islam (actual name withheld), on 19.02.2026.
3.1. The essence of allegation, made in the FIR dated 19.02.2026, is that after the demise of the father of the informant/victim, in the year 2020, her mother employed one Isfaqur Jahan Ali as their worker in their house and during that period, he allegedly attempted to sexually assault her, but could not succeed. Further, on the night of 18.02.2026, the accused entered into her room while she was at sleep and attempted to rape her and threatened to kill her if she discloses the incident to others.
4. Mr. Kataki, learned senior counsel, appearing for the accused, submits that the accused was arrested on 20.02.2026 and since then, he has been languishing in jail hazot for more than 7 months. Mr. Kataki further submits that the evidence of the victim girl had been recorded and copy of the said evidence has been produced before this Court by way of an additional affidavit.
4.1. Mr. Kataki also submits that the allegation pertains to the year 2020, while the informant was minor and for several years she remained silent and thereafter, lodged the FIR and that the mother of the victim girl has not implicated the accused with the offence alleged in the FIR.
4.2. Mr. Kataki further submits that the punishment prescribed for the offences is only 3 years and that the accused is ready to face the trial and therefore, it is contended to allow this petition.
5. Per-contra, Mr. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, has opposed the petition on the ground that the evidence of the victim girl is consistent with her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS and also with the allegation made in the FIR. Mr. Goswami further submits that other material witnesses are yet to be examined and therefore, it is contended to dismiss the petition.
6. On the other hand, Mr. Bora, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2, submits that the victim girl has clearly implicated the accused with the offence alleged in the FIR and her evidence is consistent throughout. Mr. Bora further submits that some of the material witnesses are yet to be examined and if the accused is enlarged on bail, at this stage, the possibility of threat, coercion and intimidation to the witnesses, who are yet to be examined, by the accused, cannot be ruled out and therefore, Mr. Bora has contended to dismiss the petition.
7. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties, this Court has carefully gone through the petition as well as the documents placed on record and also gone through the scanned copy of the record.
8. It appears that the evidence of the victim girl is consistent with the allegation made in the FIR and also with the statement made under Section 183 of the BNSS. Further, it appears from the FIR that the accused had threatened to kill the victim girl on 18.02.2026, if she resisted him or disclosed the incident to others.
9. Since some of the material witnesses are yet to be examined and that the anguish of the learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 that there is possibility of threat, coercion and intimidation on the part of the accused to the witnesses, if he enlarged on bail, also cannot be ruled out.
10. Under the given facts and circumstances, this Court is of the view that this is not a fit case where the privilege of bail can be granted to the accused.
11. Accordingly, this BA stands dismissed.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant