Mobin Marak @ Mabinson Marak vs The State Of Asam And Anr
2023 Latest Caselaw 918 Gua

                                                                       Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010228942022




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

                                Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/705/2022

             MOBIN MARAK @ MABINSON MARAK
             S/O LATE GULENDRA SANGMA
             VILLAGE BAKJRAPUR, PS DUDHNOI, DIST GOALPARA, ASSAM, 783122
             VERSUS
             THE STATE OF ASAM AND ANR.
             REPRESENTED BY PP ASSAM
             2:MS. SPENCER R. SANGMA
             W/O DILCHENG MOMIN
              RESIDENT OF BAKHRAPUR
              PS DUDHNOI
              DIST GOALPARA
             ASSAM. 78312

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. N UDDIN

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

                                  BEFORE
                HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
                   HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MALASRI NANDI

                                          ORDER

10.03.2023 (M. Zothankhuma, J)

1. Heard Mr. N. Uddin, learned counsel for the applicant/appellant. Also heard Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Mr. D. Barua, learned counsel appears on behalf of Mr. H. Das, learned counsel for the informant.

Page No.# 2/3

2. This is an application under Section 389 Cr.P.C for suspension of the impugned judgment and order dated 17.11.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge, Goalpara in Special (POCSO) Case No.37/2019 and to allow the applicant to go on bail.

3. The applicant's counsel submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the above case and that there is nothing in the evidence to show that rape was committed upon the victim girl. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the evidence of the victim girl clearly shows that the victim girl's private parts have been violated as the applicant had apparently pushed his finger into her private parts. She also submits that the medical report made by the Doctor shows that there was inflammation (redness & swelling) and bruising of both labia majora, which corroborates the evidence of the victim girl that her private parts had been violated by the applicant. She accordingly submits that the application should be rejected. The counsel for the informant also reiterates the submission made by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

4. We have heard the learned counsels for the parties.

5. The victim girl was 6 (six) years old at the time of occurrence of the alleged incident and in her evidence, she has stated that the applicant had pushed his finger into her private parts. The Medical Report of the Doctor shows that there was bruising of both labia majora along with the inflammation Page No.# 3/3

(redness & swelling). The opinion of the Doctor is also to the effect that the examination of the victim girl was consistent with recent sexual intercourse/assault and sign of violent marks was also seen at the time of examination.

6. On considering the above facts, we are not inclined to suspend the sentence. Accordingly, the application for suspension of the sentence and bail is rejected.

                             JUDGE                      JUDGE




Comparing Assistant