Gauhati High Court
AB/123/2026 of MD RAFIKUL ISLAM Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR on 24 February 2026
GAHC010006042026 2026:GAU-AS:2939 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/123/2026 MD RAFIKUL ISLAM S/O ABDUL HASIM,VILL-DAKHIN KHATUAL, P.S. RUPAHI,ITAPARA O.P.DIST- NAGAON ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010006042026
2026:GAU-AS:2939
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/123/2026
MD RAFIKUL ISLAM
S/O ABDUL HASIM,VILL-DAKHIN KHATUAL, P.S. RUPAHI,ITAPARA
O.P.DIST- NAGAON ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
2:MD. RAFIKUL ISLAM
SON OF LATE ABDUL HEKIM
VILL- LOWGAON
P.S. SADAR DIST. NAGAON
ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MS B DEVI, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR SARFRAZ NAWAZ, AMICUS CURIAE (R-2)
BEFORE
HON’BLE 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
25.02.2026 Heard Ms B Devi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr B Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam, and Mr S Nawaz, learned counsel appearing for the informant.
2. This is an application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023, praying for pre-arrest Page No.# 2/2 bail in connection with Special (POCSO) Case No. 255/2025, which is pending trial in the Court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum- Special Judge (POCSO), Nagaon, Assam.
3. The petitioner received summons from the Court to appear and face the trial, since charges are framed.
4. At this stage, this Court is of the opinion that if the petitioner was not arrested during the period of investigation, the apprehension that he may be arrested when he appears before the Trial Court, has to be tested before the learned Trial Court by moving an appropriate application before the learned appropriate Court. If such an application for regular bail is moved before the learned Trial Court, the same shall be considered on its own merits, without reference to the dismissal of this present anticipatory bail application.
4. The Anticipatory Bail Application is dismissed.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant