Gauhati High Court

Page No.# 1/8 vs The State Of Assam on 25 September, 2025

                                                                   Page No.# 1/8

GAHC010077102025




                                                            undefined

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

                           Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/367/2025

         SMTI. BHAN SAIKIA
         W/O- MOON SAIKIA.
         R/O- VILL.- KUHIARBARI, MAU TELAHI,
         P.S- PANIGAON,
         DIST.- LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM.
         PIN- 787052

         2: SMT. MANIKA SAIKIA
          D/O- NANDA SAIKIA
         R/O- VILL.- KUHIARBARI
          MAU TELAHI

         P.S- PANIGAON

         DIST.- LAKHIMPUR
         ASSAM.
         PIN- 78705

         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM
         REPRESENTED BY PP, ASSAM

         3:SIDHARAM KALITA
          S/O- SABHARAM KALITA
         R/O- VIIL.- RANTIJAN
          MOUZA- TELAHI

         P.O.- PANIGAON

         P.S- PANIGAON

         DIST.- LAKHIMPUR
         PIN-787052
                                                                   Page No.# 2/8


            4:AKONI RAJKHOWA
             S/O- LATE BEGON RAJKHOWA
            R/O- VIIL.- RANTIJAN
             MOUZA- TELAHI

            P.O.- PANIGAON

            P.S- PANIGAON

            DIST.- LAKHIMPUR
            PIN-787052

            5:BHABA BARUAH
             S/O- LATE BAPU BORAH
            R/O- VIIL.- RANTIJAN
             MOUZA- TELAHI

            P.O.- PANIGAON

            P.S- PANIGAON

            DIST.- LAKHIMPUR
            PIN-78705

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MISS ANJALI BARUAH, MR. U K DAS

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,




             Linked Case : Crl.A./129/2025

            SMTI. BHAN SAIKIA
            W/O- MOON SAIKIA.
            R/O- VILL.- KUHIARBARI
            MAU TELAHI

            P.S- PANIGAON

            DIST.- LAKHIMPUR
            ASSAM.
            PIN- 787052

            2: SMT. MANIKA SAIKIA
                                   Page No.# 3/8

D/O- NANDA SAIKIA
R/O- VILL.- KUHIARBARI
MAU TELAHI

P.S- PANIGAON

DIST.- LAKHIMPUR
ASSAM.
PIN- 787052
VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 OTHERS
REP BY PP ASSAM

2:SIDHARAM KALITA
S/O- SABHARAM KALITA
R/O- VIIL.- RANTIJAN
 MOUZA- TELAHI

P.O.- PANIGAON

P.S- PANIGAON

DIST.- LAKHIMPUR
PIN-787052

3:AKONI RAJKHOWA
S/O- LATE BEGON RAJKHOWA
R/O- VIIL.- RANTIJAN
MOUZA- TELAHI

P.O.- PANIGAON

P.S- PANIGAON

DIST.- LAKHIMPUR
PIN-787052

4:BHABA BARUAH
S/O- LATE BAPU BORAH
R/O- VIIL.- RANTIJAN
MOUZA- TELAHI

P.O.- PANIGAON

P.S- PANIGAON

DIST.- LAKHIMPUR
                                                                          Page No.# 4/8

          PIN-787052
          ------------
          Advocate for : MISS ANJALI BARUAH
          Advocate for : appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 OTHERS



                               BEFORE
                 HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN

                                     ORDER

25.09.2025

Heard Mr. U.K. Das, learned counsel appearing for the applicants. Also

heard Mr. B. Sharma, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State.

This is an application for suspension of sentence imposed vide Judgment

and Order dated 11.02.2025 passed by the Sessions Judge, Lakhimpur at North

Lakhimpur in Sessions case No. 111 (NL)/2019 by which the applicants were

convicted and sentenced to undergo SI for five (5) years with fine and default

stipulation under Section 366A/34 of the IPC. The appellants have also prayed

for subsequent bail under Section 430 of the BNSS, 2023.

The prosecution case in brief is that on 04.09.2025, the informants lodged

an FIR before the Superintendent of Police, Lakhimpur at North Lakhimpur

stating inter alia that their minor daughters namely X, Y and Z aged about 15

years were engaged in prostitution by the appellants and that the said fact was

known to the local people of the said village. It is also alleged in the FIR that

the applicants had taken away the victim girls and while they were on their way, Page No.# 5/8

the villagers apprehended them but the accused i.e., the applicants managed to

escape.

Mr. Mr. U.K. Das, learned counsel appearing for the applicants submitted

that the evidence of the victim girls who have deposed as PW-3, 4 and 5

revealed that while they were on their way to their school, the applicants took

them to the house of Smt. Labanya Dutta who was examined as PW-7 and was

asked to changed their uniforms in the said place of Smt. Labanya Dutta and

that after they changed their clothes, the applicants took them in a vehicle

towards Lakhimpur town and that while they were proceeding towards the

same, the villagers apprehended them at a particular place and brought back to

their village. He stated that all the three (3) victims had given similar statements

before the Trial Court. He further referred to the statement given by PW-7 in

whose house the victims were made to change their clothes and she stated that

the victims had in fact changed their clothes in her house and that when she

asked the victims as to where they were going, the victims replied that they

were going to the house of their uncle at Sungapara. The learned counsel had

also referred to the statement of PW-8 who stated that when he was informed

that two (2) girls were not attending their school, he inquired and he found out

that the girls have bunked their school and during the said inquiry, when PW-8

was returning home, he saw the girls waiting for vehicle at Sungapara. He as Page No.# 6/8

such, submits that the said statement of PW-8 has corroborated the statement

of the victims who stated that they were going to the house of their uncle at

Sungapara. As such, the learned counsel submits that the offence under Section

366A of IPC is not attracted in the instant case and that the applicants are no

way involved in the said incident.

Mr. B. Sharma, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor however submits that there

are evidence on record more specifically the deposition of PW- 3, 4 and 5 who

had stated that the applicants had taken them from the school and were made

to change their clothes and were also taken to some other places by way of a

public vehicle. However, he submits that on the way, the villagers apprehended

them otherwise the applicants would have taken the victims leading to offence

under Section 366A of the IPC. By the timely intervention of the villagers the

same could not take place.

I have heard the counsels and have gone through the depositions as well

as other materials on record.

In the instant case, the statement of the victim assumes importance and if

the same inspires confidence, the offence would be attracted. It is noticed in the

evidence of PW-3 who is one of the victims that one day the applicants had

taken her and other friends to Lakhimpur town and then took her and her

friends to a particular hotel and got them introduced with two (2) boys who Page No.# 7/8

however is stated to have misbehaved with the victims and had abused them

physically and that thereafter, they returned home. It is also in the evidence of

the victims that on another day, the applicants took them to the house of Smt.

Labanya Dutta i.e., PW-7, who made them change their clothes and took them

to Lakhimpur town and that when they were proceeding towards the same, the

villagers apprehended them and brought the victims to their house. Further

more, it is in the evidence of PW-7 that when she asked the victims as to where

they were going after they had changed their clothes, the victims revealed that

they were going to their uncle's house and that the victims were found waiting

for vehicle at Sungapara by PW-8.

Section 366A of the IPC reads as follows:-

"366A. Procuration of minor girl.--Whoever, by any means

whatsoever, induces any minor girl under the age of eighteen years to go from

any place or to do any act with intent that such girl may be, or knowing that it

is likely that she will be, forced or seduced to illicit intercourse with another

person shall be punishable with imprisonment which may extend to ten years,

and shall also be liable to fine."

A bare perusal of the said section makes it clear that if minor girl below

eighteen years is taken from any place and is made to or forced into illicit sexual

intercourse with another person the accused shall be punished with the Page No.# 8/8

prescribed punishment.

In the instant case, the evidences of the victims did not reveal that the

applicants had taken them to some other place in order to force them or to

seduce them into sexual intercourse with other person. The evidence under

Section 366A of the IPC is prima facie lacking in the instant case.

In view of the same, the sentence imposed upon the applicants may be

suspended and the applicants may be released on bail on furnishing of a bail

bond of Rs. 20,000/-(Rupees twenty thousand) each with two (2) local sureties

each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Sessions Judge, Lakhimpur at