Utpal Biswas Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Heard Mr. D. Medhi, learned counsel for the accused applicant and Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State as well as Ms. M. K. Brown, learned Amicus Curiae for the respondent No. 2.

¶18

2. This is an application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 for granting prearrest bail to the accused applicant in connection with Laluk P.S. Case No. 103/2026 under Sections 65(1)/87 read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act, corresponding to Special POCSO Case No. 74/2026.

¶19

3. The present case arises out of an FIR dated 28.05.2026 lodged by the informant alleging, inter alia, that her minor daughter, Ms. XX, aged about 16 years, had left for her college on 26.05.2026 but did not return home. Upon searching for her, the informant came to know that her daughter was staying with the accused applicant at Santipur in Dhemaji District. After the victim returned home, she was medically examined and it was found that she was pregnant by about one and a half months.

¶20

4. Upon receipt of the FIR, the police registered Laluk P.S. Case No. 103/2026 under the aforesaid sections of law.

¶21

5. Mr. Medhi, learned counsel for the accused applicant, submits that the accused applicant, aged about 20 years, was in a love relationship with the victim girl. According to the learned counsel, the victim girl had voluntarily accompanied the accused applicant to Arunachal Pradesh, where they stayed for two days. Upon learning that a criminal case had been registered, both of them

¶22

Page No.# 3/4

¶23

voluntarily appeared before the Doolahat Police Outpost. He further submits that the statement of the victim girl under Section 183 of the BNSS has already been recorded and therefore, further custodial interrogation of the accused applicant may not be required at this stage. It is also submitted that the accused applicant has no criminal antecedents and that, in the event of his arrest, his livelihood would be seriously jeopardized, particularly considering that he is only 20 years of age. Learned counsel further submits that the accused applicant is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and shall neither tamper with the evidence nor influence any witness.

¶24

6. On the other hand, Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, opposes the prayer for bail, contending that the victim girl is a minor and that the investigation is still in progress. He, therefore, submits that the accused applicant is not entitled to the privilege of pre-arrest bail at this stage.

¶25

7. Ms. M. K. Brown, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the informant, also opposes the bail application, submitting that, if released on bail, the accused applicant may influence the victim girl and interfere with the course of investigation.

¶26

8. The Case Diary has been received and I have carefully perused materials available on record.

¶27

9. A perusal of the materials available on record reveals that the victim girl had voluntarily eloped with the accused applicant and stayed with him. Her statement under Section 183 of the BNSS has already been recorded. It further appears from the record that both the victim girl and the accused applicant voluntarily appeared before and surrendered at the Doolahat Police Outpost.

¶28

10. Having regard to the fact that both the victim girl and the accused

¶29

Page No.# 4/4

¶30

applicant are young persons and that the investigation has substantially progressed, this Court is of the considered view that further custodial detention of the accused applicant may not be required in the instant case.

¶31

11. Accordingly, it is directed that, in the event of the arrest of the accused applicant by the arresting authority, he shall be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 30,000 (Rupees Thirty Thousand) with one surety of like amount, to the satisfaction of the arresting authority, in connection with Laluk P.S. Case No. 103/2026, subject to the following conditions:

¶32

i. that the accused applicant shall appear before the investigating officer within 10 (ten) days from passing of this order;

¶33

ii. that the accused applicant shall cooperate with the investigation and make himself available before the investigating authority as and when call for;

¶34

iii. that the accused applicant shall not directly or indirectly try to hamper or tamper with the investigation in the instant case;

¶35

iv. that the accused applicant shall not try to get in touch with the victim girl and shall not try to influence any witnesses that may be connected with the instant case.

¶36

12. In view of the above directions, the pre-arrest bail application stands disposed of as allowed.

¶37

JUDGE

¶38

Comparing Assistant

Utpal Biswas v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Utpal Biswas 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

Akramin Ali and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Amal Saikia Vs the State of Assam

Sri Raja Saha Alias Akash Vs the State of Assam

Amir Hussain Mondol Alias Amir Mondol Vs the State of Assam

Shri Dipak Kumar Bora Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Bashabi Kalita Vs the State of Assam