Gauhati High Court
Bail Appln./891/2026 of JURI DAS Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR on 7 April 2026
GAHC010061192026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./891/2026 JURI DAS WIFE OF PRADIP DAS RESIDENT OF BAGTA, P.S. HAJO DIST. KAMRUP, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:S.I. KUSHAL DEKA
GAHC010061192026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./891/2026
JURI DAS
WIFE OF PRADIP DAS
RESIDENT OF BAGTA, P.S. HAJO
DIST. KAMRUP, ASSAM.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
REP BY THE PP, ASSAM
2:S.I. KUSHAL DEKA (INFORMANT)
GORCHUK POLICE STATION
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R SARMA, A H CHOUDHURY
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS. M K BROWN, AMICUS CURIAE(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
08.04.2026
1. Heard Mr. R.Sarma, learned counsel appearing for the accused petitioner as well as Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Addl. P.P., Assam appearing for the State respondent and Ms. M. K. Brown, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for respondent No.2.
2. This petition under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the accused-petitioner, namely, Juri Das, praying for grant of bail in connection with Session (Spl.) Case No. 217/2025 arising out of Gorchuk P.S. Case No.269/2025 under Sections 6 of POCSO Act, Section 143(5)/144(1) of BNS R/W Section 3(2)(a) /4/5(1)(d)(ii) of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956. She was arrested on 01.10.2025.
3. The allegations against the petitioner is about involvement in trafficking of minor girls and forcing them into prostitution at a hotel in Guwahati. The victims are stated to be from the district of Kokrajhar. It is submitted by the learned counsel that so far out of 10 listed witnesses, 5 witnesses have been examined including the victim and the informant and that the testimonies suffer from contradictions. It is also submitted about the length of detention.
4. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the testimony of the victims have been cogent including in the aspect of identification and that the alleged offenses are of very serious nature. Ms. Brown, learned Amicus Curie supporting the submissions of the Prosecution submits that the alleged offenses are heinous in nature and against society.
5. I have gone through the relevant portions of the record which is available for the purpose of adjudication of this case.
6. The victims are stated to be aged 16 and 17 years. It is revealed from the materials that they got lured with the prospect of being given some job and then found themselves being forced into prostitution. The alleged offenses pertain to trafficking under the Indian Penal Code; repeated penetrative sexual assault under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and also provisions of the Immoral Traffic Act.
7. In this context, the learned petitioner counsel submits that the investigation was done by SI though as per the Immoral Traffic Act, it is required to be done by an inspector.
8. That aspect would be a matter of trial. Alleged offenses of human trafficking, child sexual abuse and forcing children into prostitution is a very serious matter and despite the length of detention, as the trial is still in progress, I am of the considered view that it would be prudent not to grant bail at this stage.
9. In such view of the matter, the bail petition stands rejected at this stage and disposed of accordingly.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant