Gauhati High Court
Bail Appln./854/2026 of SHOHIDUL ISLAM Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR on 3 May 2026
GAHC010060232026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./854/2026 SHOHIDUL ISLAM SON OF NIZAMUDDIN SHEIKH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - CHATAGURI PART - 2, P.S. BOGRIBARI, IN THE DISTRICT OF KOKRAJHAR ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE
GAHC010060232026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./854/2026
SHOHIDUL ISLAM
SON OF NIZAMUDDIN SHEIKH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - CHATAGURI PART
- 2, P.S. BOGRIBARI, IN THE DISTRICT OF KOKRAJHAR ASSAM.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM.
2:SAMIRON KHATUN
WIFE OF TOSER UDDIN
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - RANGAMATI PART - 2
P.O. RANGAMATI PANBARI
P.S. GAURIPUR
IN THE DISTRICT OF DHUBRI
ASSAM
PIN - 783339
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M A MONDAL, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. MEHUL SHAH(R2),MS. J GHOSH(R2),MR. S C
BISWAS(R2)
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS
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 : 04.05.2026
Heard Mr. M.A. Mondal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard
Mr. MP. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and Mr. S.C. Biswas, learned counsel for the informant/respondent No.2.
2. This application has been filed under section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraskha Sanhita, 2023, whereby the accused petitioner namely, Shohidul Islam, has prayed for bail in connection with Special (POCSO) Case No. 101/2026 (arising out of Gauripur P.S. Case No. 63/2026) under Section 6 of POCSO Act, pending before learned Special Judge (POCSO), Dhubri.
3. The petitioner was arrested on 02.03.2026 after the registration of the case alleging commission of penetrative sexual assault upon the victim stated to be a minor, leading to her pregnancy as well.
4. The scanned TCR has been received.
5. Mr. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the victim girl has not been examined as part of the trial, therefore, he objects to the grant of bail at this stage.
6. Mr. Biswas, learned counsel for the informant, has also supporting his affidavit-in-opposition concurs with the submission of the prosecution, that the victim may be examined.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the meantime, the petitioner and the girl have contracted social marriage, which however is denied by the learned counsel for the respondent No. 2/informant.
8. Perused the statement of the victim girl recorded before learned Magistrate and noted the implications there against the present petitioner.
The materials prima facie indicated her to be a minor, at the time of the alleged incident.
9. I find force in the contentions of the prosecution and the informant side and accordingly, the bail petition stands rejected at this stage.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant