Gauhati High Court
Sanjul Hussain Laskar vs The State Of Assam And Anr on 11 November, 2025
Author: M. Zothankhuma
Bench: Michael Zothankhuma
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010137622025
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/702/2025
SANJUL HUSSAIN LASKAR
S/O. ALA UDDIN
R/O. NAGAKHAL
P/S. KACHUDARAM
DIST. CACHAR
ASSAM.
VERSUS
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.
Linked Case : Crl.A./236/2025
SANJUL HUSSAIN LASKAR
S/O. ALA UDDIN, R/O. NAGAKHAL, P/S. KACHUDARAM, DIST. CACHAR,
ASSAM.
Page No.# 2/5
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS
REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM.
2:SUNA MIA
S/O. SAYUB ALI
R/O. NAGAKHAL
P/S. KACHUDARAM
DIST. CACHAR
ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. B. HAZARIKA, MS F N ZAMAN,MD. MEMON AHMED,MS.
R CHOUDHURY
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
BEFORE
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.
2. 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.
Page No.# 3/5
3. 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 applicant-
appellant 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.
4. 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.
5. Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned Addl. P.P., on the other hand, submits that though
Page No.# 4/5
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.
6. We have heard the learned counsels for the parties.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. 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
Page No.# 5/5
disposal of the appeal.
10. The I.A. is accordingly allowed and disposed of.
JUDGE JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
