Sanjul Hussain Laskar Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

¶1

Page No.# 1/5

¶2

GAHC010137622025

¶3

undefined

¶4

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶5

Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/702/2025

¶6

SANJUL HUSSAIN LASKAR S/O. ALA UDDIN R/O. NAGAKHAL P/S. KACHUDARAM DIST. CACHAR ASSAM.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REP. BY THE PP ASSAM. 2:SUNA MIA S/O. SAYUB ALI R/O. NAGAKHAL P/S. KACHUDARAM DIST. CACHAR ASSAM. -----------Advocate for : MS. B. HAZARIKA Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR.

¶9

Linked Case : Crl.A./236/2025

¶10

SANJUL HUSSAIN LASKAR S/O. ALA UDDIN, R/O. NAGAKHAL, P/S. KACHUDARAM, DIST. CACHAR, ASSAM.

¶11

Page No.# 2/5

¶12

VERSUS

¶13

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM.

¶14

2:SUNA MIA S/O. SAYUB ALI R/O. NAGAKHAL P/S. KACHUDARAM DIST. CACHAR ASSAM

¶15

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. B. HAZARIKA, MS F N ZAMAN,MD. MEMON AHMED,MS. R CHOUDHURY

¶16

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,

¶17

BEFORE

¶18

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA

ORDER

11.11.2025

(M. Zothankhuma, J)

Heard Ms. R. Choudhury, learned counsel for the applicant/appellant. Also heard Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned Sr. Counsel and Addl. P.P., Assam appearing for the respondent No.1. No one appears on behalf of the respondent No.2, even though the order dated 27.08.2025 passed in the main appeal states that service is complete against the respondent No.2.

¶23

The instant application under Section 430 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is preferred seeking suspension of execution of the sentence passed against the applicant/appellant and for his release on bail.

¶24

Page No.# 3/5

¶25

The applicant as appellant has preferred the accompanying criminal appeal against a Judgment dated 07.05.2025 and an Order on Sentence dated 09.05.2025 passed by the Court of learned Special Judge (POCSO), Cachar, Silchar in Special (POCSO) Case No. 105/2024, arising out of Kachudaram Police Station Case No. 144/2023. By the Judgment and the Order on Sentence, the applicant/appellant has been convicted for the offences under Sections 366 and Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. In view of Section 42 of the POCSO Act, the applicant-appellant has been sentenced under Section 6 of the POCSO Act. For the offence under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, the applicantappellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for twenty years and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-, with default stipulation. For the offence under Section 366 of the IPC, the applicant-appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- with default stipulation. Both the sentences are ordered to run concurrently.

¶26

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that there was no forced sexual intercourse between the parties and that the applicant was not aware that the victim was less than 18 years at the time of commission of the offence. Further, the applicant has questioned the age of the victim which he believed to be above 18 years at the time of the incident. She accordingly submits that when there has been no proof of rape and the age of the victim has to be determined afresh during the appeal, the applicant should be allowed to go on bail.

¶27

Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned Addl. P.P., on the other hand, submits that though

¶28

Page No.# 4/5

¶29

the applicant had tried to allude to the fact that the victim was above 18 years of age during trial, the learned Trial Court did not accept the same, inasmuch as, the Court witness had exhibited the birth certificate of the victim, which showed that she was 16 ½ years at the time the incident occurred. She accordingly submits that when there has been consensual intercourse between an adult and a child, Section 6 of the POCSO Act has rightly been applied by the learned Trial Court.

¶30

We have heard the learned counsels for the parties.

¶31

Para 42 of the impugned judgment shows that the victim girl had stayed willingly with the applicant for around a month. Further, para 28 of the impugned judgment shows that the defence had tried to make out a case that the victim was not a child during the commission of the offence.

¶32

On considering the fact that the said issues are going to be looked into afresh during this appeal and as the paper book has not been prepared till date, despite an order having been made to do so, this Court is of the view that till such time as the paper book is prepared and the appeal is decided, the applicant should be released on bail. Accordingly, the applicant is released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.50,000/- with one surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.

¶33

Consequently, the sentence imposed under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and Section 366 of the IPC upon the applicant in relation to the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Cachar, Silchar in Special (POCSO) Case No. 105/2024, is hereby suspended till final

¶34

Page No.# 5/5

¶35

disposal of the appeal.

¶36

The I.A. is accordingly allowed and disposed of.

¶37

JUDGE JUDGE

¶38

Comparing Assistant

Sanjul Hussain Laskar v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjul Hussain Laskar v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Binanda Dahotiya @ Swadesh Asom @ Binanda Dohutia Vs the National Investigation Agency

Bubul Moran @ Tiger Asom Vs the National Investigation Agency

Abdul Hamid Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Pranab Talukdar and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Dhania Sabor Vs the State of Assam

Haren Phukan Vs the State of Assam and Anr.