Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/4 vs The State Of Assam And Anr on 28 August, 2025
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010057412025
2025:GAU-AS:11540
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/289/2025
JAYNAL ABEDIN @ ABDUL SIKDAR
S/O- SHAHA ALI, VILL- GOBINDAPUR, P.S- GOBORDHANA, DIST- BAKSA,
ASSAM.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
REP BY THE PP, ASSAM
2:MOYEJ UDDIN
S/O- JAYNAL ABDIN
VILL-GOBINDAPUR
P.S-GOBARDHANA
DIST- BAKSA
ASSAM
PIN- 78131
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H A AHMED, MR. R ALI
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS. R B BORA, LEGAL AID COUNSEL, R2
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN
ORDER
28.08.2025
Heard Mr. H.A. Ahmed, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard D.P.
Goswami, learned Add. Public Prosecutor for the State respondent and Mr. R.B.
Page No.# 2/4
Bora, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the respondent No. 2.
2. By this application, the applicant has prayed for suspension of the
sentence and the subsequent bail in connection with the impugned Judgment &
Order dated 18.02.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge, Baksa in Spl.
POCSO Case No. 15/2018, by which the applicant was convicted under Section 8
of the POCSO Act and was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 3
(three) years with fine and default stipulation.
3. The FIR lodged in the instant case reveals that the victim alongwith her
younger sister had gone to the shop of the applicant to purchase some goods
and that in absence of any other person, the applicant induced the victim and
took her inside the shop and after undressing her, the applicant tried to commit
bad act upon her. It is also stated that the minor girl wanted to shout but then
the applicant gagged her mouth. It is also stated in the FIR that another minor
girl, namely Rabiya Khatun had seen the applicant and the victim in almost a
naked condition and that seeing her, the applicant left the scene.
4. On receipt of the ejahar, the Police registered the case under Section
376(2)(i) IPC read with Section 8/18 of the POCSO Act. After completion of the
investigation, the Police submitted Charge-sheet against the applicant and after
completion of the necessary requirements, the charges were framed by the
concerned Court and the trial was conducted and on completion of the said trial,
the applicant was convicted and sentenced as mentioned above.
5. It is a settled position of law that in cases under the POCSO Act, the
statement of the victim has to be examined from the very initial stage to her
statement before the Trial Court and if the same is found consistent, the
conviction can be granted on the sole basis of the said statement.
Page No.# 3/4
6. In the instant case, it is noticed that the victim, who was stated to be 8-9
years old had stated before the Trial Court that she and her younger sister went
to the shop of the applicant and when her younger sister demanded a packet of
biscuit without giving any money, the applicant called the victim inside his shop
and offered a guava and that he took her inside the room and by opening her
undergarments, he laid her down and he also had opened his clothes and that
one Rabiya Khatun saw the incident through the window.
7 In her statement before the Magistrate, the victim stated that she and her
younger sister went to the shop of the applicant and that seeing her, the
applicant called her inside saying that she can take whatever she wants and on
that, both the victim and her younger sister went inside and that the applicant
by holding her hand, took her inside the room and that the applicant opened
her clothes and his clothes too and laid her down and that when she wanted to
shout, he had gagged her mouth and she also stated that the applicant slapped
her and that when the applicant wanted to do bad act upon her, one Rabiya
Khatun saw the incident and on seeing her, the applicant fled from the scene.
8. Before the Police, the victim did not state the fact that she narrated before
the Magistrate as well as before the Trial Court. There seems to be
contradictions in the said case and the said contradictions were proved by the
Police during his examination before the Trial Court, wherein, the Investigating
Officer stated that the victim did not tell her about the younger sister
demanding biscuit from the applicant or the applicant opening his clothes by
pulling her down on the bed and that he pressed her mouth and also that
Rabiya Khatun saw the incident. There also appears contradiction in respect of
the sequence of the events.
9. Further, it is also reflected that PW-4, who is Rabiya Khatun and who is
Page No.# 4/4
stated to have seen the incident has also contradicted in her statement when
recorded by the Investigating Officer and before the Trial Court, inasmuch as,
she did not state before the Investigating Officer that she saw the applicant
sleeping over the body of the victim.
10. Since this is an application for suspension of sentence and the settled
position of law is that while considering the said application, the prima facie
view of the entire case needs to be looked into, it is noticed on a prima facie
consideration that there is contradiction in the statement of the victim and as
such, in view of the same, the sentence of the applicant may be suspended and
the consequent bail may be granted to the applicant.
11. The applicant may be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.
20,000/- with 1 local surety of a like amount to the satisfaction of the learned
Court of Special Judge (POCSO), Baksa under the following conditions:-
1. The petitioner will not approach the victim or any family members at any
point of time.
2. The petitioner will not leave the place of residence without the prior
permission of the learned Court of Special Judge (POCSO), Baksa.
12. Accordingly, the Interlocutory Application stands disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
