Gauhati High Court
I.A.(Crl.)/1245/2024 of RANJAN BORUAH Vs STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR on 23 June 2026
GAHC010262422024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/1245/2024 RANJAN BORUAH S/O SRI SACHINDRA BARUAH, RESIDENT OF JATIA UJJAL NAGAR, GANESHGURI, PS DISPUR, DIST KAMRUP M ASSAM VERSUS STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
GAHC010262422024
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/1245/2024
RANJAN BORUAH
S/O SRI SACHINDRA BARUAH,
RESIDENT OF JATIA UJJAL NAGAR, GANESHGURI, PS DISPUR, DIST
KAMRUP M ASSAM
VERSUS
STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
REPRESENTED BY PP ASSAM
2:MAMTA BEGUM
W/O RAHIM UDDIN
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE CHOTE LENGRI
PS DILLAI
DIST KARBI ANGLONG
ASSA
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR D TALUKDAR, MS B GOSWAMI,MR P CHOUDHURY,MS P
SAIKIA
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. A M DUTTA, AMICUS CURIAE (R-2)
Linked Case : Crl.A./425/2024
RANJAN BORUAH
S/O SRI SACHINDRA BARUAH
RESIDENT OF JATIA UJJAL NAGAR
GANESHGURI
PS DISPUR
DIST KAMRUP M ASSAM
VERSUS
STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
REPRESENTED BBY PP ASSAM
2:MAMTA BEGUM
W/O RAHIM UDDIN
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE CHOTE LENGRI
PS DILLAI
DIST KARBI ANGLONG
ASSAM
------------
Advocate for : MR D TALUKDAR
Advocate for : PP
ASSAM appearing for STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
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
24.06.2026 (Michael Zothankhuma, J)
Heard Mr. D. Talukdar, learned Senior Counsel for the applicant/appellant. Also heard Mr. R.R. Kaushik, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor and Mr. A.M. Datta for the respondent No. 2.
2. The applicant has prayed for suspending the sentence to be undergone by the applicant pursuant to his conviction under Section 376(2)(f)/458 IPC by the learned District & Sessions Judge, Karbi Anglong, Diphu in Sessions Case No.
134/2015.
3. The applicant’s counsel submits the evidence of the mother of the victim shows that she was sleeping with her children when she was woken up, on hearing her daughter making a hue and cry. She then saw the applicant going out of their room and her daughter told her that the said applicant had raped her. However, the medical report and evidence of the Doctor only speaks of there being a small tear in the fourchette while the hymen was intact and there was no spermatozoa seen in the vaginal swab. Further, there was no evidence of sexual intercourse within 72 hours, though the medical examination of the victim was suggestive of manipulation of genitalia.
4. Mr. R.R. Kaushik, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor on the other hand submits that the tear on the fourchette does not prove that no rape had been committed on the victim. Further, there are many families in India who are living in single rooms and it cannot be said that just because the family slept in one room, a minor girl could not be raped.
5. Mr. A.M. Datta, learned Amicus Curiae reiterates the submission made by the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor.
6. On considering the evidence of the victim girl and keeping in view the Doctor’s opinion that the medical examination of the victim was suggestive of manipulation of her genitalia, we are of the view that the application should not be allowed at this stage.
7. Accordingly, the application is rejected.
JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant