Gauhati High Court
Bail Appln./897/2026 of MOYNAL HOQUE ALIAS MAYNAL HOQUE Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR on 26 April 2026
GAHC010062282026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./897/2026 MOYNAL HOQUE ALIAS MAYNAL HOQUE S/O MANSER ALI R/O WARD NO. 6, SATBER,PIN-783348, P.S. BILASIPARA, DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND
GAHC010062282026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./897/2026
MOYNAL HOQUE ALIAS MAYNAL HOQUE
S/O MANSER ALI
R/O WARD NO. 6, SATBER,PIN-783348, P.S. BILASIPARA, DIST. DHUBRI, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
REP BY THE PP, ASSAM
2:SUKUMAR GORIYA (INFORMANT)
S/O LT. LAKHAN GORIYA
R/O WARD NO. 11
BILASIPARA
P.S. BILASIPARA
DIST. DHUBRI
ASSAM
PIN-783348
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M BORAH, MS B BORA,R KHATUN
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR J PAYENG (R-2)
BEFORE
HONOURABLE 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
Date : 27.04.2026 Heard Mr. M. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Parashar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam and Mr. J.Payeng, learned counsel for the respondent No.2.
2. This is an application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 whereby the petitioner, Moynal Hoque @ Maynal Hoque has prayed for releasing him on bail after he was arrested in connection with Bilashipara P.S. Case No.372/2025 registered under Sections 65(1)/70(2)/127(2)/137(2) of the BNS, 2023 read with Section 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012.
3. The brief facts of the case is that the present petitioner, who is aged about 54 years, took the victim aged about 14 years to a paddy field and attempted sexual relationship with her. But upon arrival of 3 (three) other persons, he fled the spot. The victim was subsequently subjected to rape by the said 3 (three) persons, who have since been arrested.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has spent 144 days in custody. And considering the length of detention, the petitioner may be released on bail.
5. On the other hand, the learned Addl. P.P. as well as the learned counsel for the respondent No.2 have submitted that the petitioner is a matured man of 54 years of age and he has taken undue advantage of a 14 year old minor girl. And since the case is at the stage of framing of charge, the petitioner may not be released on bail.
6. I have duly considered the rival submissions, and considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am of the view that at this stage it would not be appropriate to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected at this stage.
7. Accordingly, the Bail Application stands disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant