Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/5 vs The State Of Assam And Anr on 13 October, 2025
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010160622025
2025:GAU-AS:13671
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/776/2025
AKHER ALI
S/O. MARFAT ALI, VILL.- DUMERGURI, P/O. DUMERGURI, P/S.
ABHAYAPURI, DIST. BONGAIGAON, ASSAM, PIN783384
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR.
REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM
2:SIDDIQUE ALI
S/O. DIDAR ALI SHEIKH
VILL.- LINGDOBA
P/S. AND DIST. BONGAIGAON
ASSAM
PIN-78337
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. I U CHOWDHURY, MR H R A CHOUDHURY,MR. A M
AHMED,B DAS
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
Page No.# 2/5
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN
ORDER
Date : 13.10.2025
1. Heard Mr. HRA Choudhury, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr.
A.M Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K
Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.
2. The present Interlocutory Application under Section 430 of
BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner for suspension of
sentence as well as bail to the applicant during the pendency of the
instant Criminal Appeal.
3. The fact of the instant case is that the victim's father lodged the
ejahar stating inter alia that the petitioner along with another had
enticed his daughter and took her to Rajasthan with the allurement
that the petitioner would marry her. But upon reaching Rajasthan it
is alleged that the petitioner forcefully raped the victim and that the
petitioner as well as the other person, had sold her to an unknown
person who again stated to have sold her to another to whom the
victim got married.
4. It is alleged that the victim, after being missing for one year,
called her father from Rajasthan and the father along with another
person had recovered her from the said place. Pursuant to the said
ejahar, the police investigated the case and submitted the charge-
sheet on completion of the investigation and thereafter, charges
were framed and the trial was conducted. During the trial, 8(eight)
witnesses were examined along with the victim and other official
Page No.# 3/5
witnesses and after examining the petitioner under Section 313 of
the Cr.P.C. the petitioner was convicted under Section 366A of IPC
and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5(five)
years with fine and default stipulation vide judgment and order
dated 10.07.2025. Against the said judgment and order, the instant
Criminal Appeal is filed by the appellant along with the Interlocutory
Application for suspension of the sentence and subsequent bail
under Section 430 of the BNSS, 2023.
5. The victim was examined as PW-2 and she stated that around 7
years back from the date of deposition, at around 12 Noon, when
she was on her way to school, the petitioner took her to his sister's
house and by keeping her there for one night, he took her to Delhi
and from Delhi he again took her to Rajasthan. She further stated
that the petitioner sold her to one Ramzan Ali in Rajasthan with
whom she got pregnant. The victim, during her cross-examination,
had stated that she married said Ramzan Ali and that she had
2(two) children out of the wedlock. She also stated that she has
been passing her married life happily with said Ramzan Ali. During
her cross-examination, she stated that she went to Dhubri on her
own will and that she could not remember how she reached
Rajasthan.
6. These statements is in the teeth of the statements made by her
during her examination-in-chief where she stated that it was the
petitioner who took her to Dhubri and then to Rajasthan. In view of
the same, the complicity of the petitioner is demolished by the
statement made by the victim in her cross-examination. The
Page No.# 4/5
statement of the father of the victim who was examined as PW-1
assumes relevance as far as the age of the victim is concerned. He
in his statement had stated that the original provisional Birth
Certificate was seized and that the same was collected by a villager
who has expired and that the said villager had informed him that the
date of birth was written in the said birth certificate. He also stated
that after a long time the provisional Birth Certificate was issued. As
such, from his statement it is disclosed that he is not aware of the
actual birth date of the victim as it is alleged to have been
mentioned in the said Birth Certificate.
7. Before the Doctor it was stated that the victim was aged 17
years. The Investigating Officer in his examination as PW-8 had
stated that he did not examine the authenticity and the genuineness
of the said original provisional Birth Certificate of the victim. Further,
the statement of PW-3 who was informed by the father of the victim
when the victim went missing, stated that after 1(one) year the
victim was found and when he along with the father of the victim
went to the place where the victim was staying and recovered her
from there, it was found that the victim was leading her conjugal life
with her husband. This witness in his cross-examination had stated
that the victim informed the complainant that she on her own went
to Rajasthan along with the person named Saiful who was not the
petitioner.
8. In view of the said discrepancies in the evidences on record, this
Court finds it fit that the sentence awarded by the Ld. Trial Court by
which the petitioner was sentenced to undergo rigorous
Page No.# 5/5
imprisonment for 5(five) years with fine and default stipulation be
suspended during the pendency of the appeal and subsequent bail,
in connection with Special (P) Case No. 23 (BGN) of 2020 arising
out of Bongaigaon PS Case No. 147/2015, may be granted to the
petitioner on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 30,000/- with 2(two) local
sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Ld. Special
Judge, Bongaigaon.
9. In view of the above, this Interlocutory Application stands
disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
