[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/5 vs The State Of Assam And 1 Ors on 10 February, 2026
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010008532026
2026:GAU-AS:1798
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Bail Appln./175/2026
SRI BOKUL SONOWAL
S/O- SRI GAUTOM SONOWAL.
R/O- 3 NO. RAMPUR, LEKHAPANI, P.S.- LEKHAPANI, DIST.-TINSUKIA,
ASSAM, PIN- 786182.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 1 ORS
REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM
2:SMTI. REKHA MISSONG
W/O- LATE JITEN MISSONG@ DIPEN MISSONG.
R/O- LAMA TINI ALI
P.S.- LEKHAPANI
DIST.- TINSUKIA
ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A K GUPTA, MR K J SAIKIA
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS B SARMA(R2),MR. R S MISHRA(R2)
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA
ORDER
10.02.2026
Heard Mr. AK Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the accused applicant.
Also heard Mr. KK Parasar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the
Page No.# 2/5
State as well as Ms. B. Sarma, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.
2.
2. This is an application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for
granting regular bail to the accused applicant, Bokul Sonowal in connection with
POCSO Case No. 03/2026 arising out of Lekhapani PS case no. 53/2025
corresponding to GR No. 47/2025 under Section 65(1) BNS read with Section 6
of POCSO, 2012.
3. An FIR was lodged on 12.08.2025 by the informant before the Lekhapani
Police Station alleging that on 11.08.2025, her daughter, aged about 15 years
old, went to her friend's house and on the following day at about 8.25 hours her
daughter called her and informed her that she had gone to Jagun. It was stated
that the informant went to Jagun to get her daughter and brought her home.
Subsequently, when questioned, her daughter revealed that the accused
applicant, a resident of the same locality, had taken her to a hotel in Jairampur
wherein both had engaged in physical relationship.
4. On receipt of the FIR, Lekhapani PS Case No. 53/2025 has been registered
against the accused applicant under the aforementioned Sections. After
investigation, the police arrested the accused applicant on 12.08.2025 and filed
a Charge Sheet against the accused applicant vide Charge Sheet No. 54/2025
under Section 65(1) BNS read with Section 6 of POCSO, 2012.
5. Mr. Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the accused applicant submits
that though Charge Sheet has been filed in the instant case, the charge has not
been framed against the accused applicant as yet and trial has not proceeded at
all due to the vacancy of the post of learned Special Judge (POCSO), Tinsukia.
He submits that till date nothing has been progressed in the instant case. In
Page No.# 3/5
addition to the aforesaid submission, he submits that the girl, who is aged about
16 years old, can understand the consequences of going with an adult person to
a hotel and she went voluntarily. Therefore, the conduct of the girl should be
also taken into consideration while considering this instant case. He further
submits that the medical report submitted along with the Charge Sheet goes
totally against the prosecution story as nothing incriminating and no evidence of
any sexual intercourse was found in the medical report submitted along with the
Charge Sheet.
6. In view of the aforesaid, the learned counsel appearing for the accused
applicant submits that since it is uncertain when the trial will be started and the
accused applicant has already been languishing in jail for more than 6 months,
at this stage, he should be allowed to go on bail.
7. Per contra, Mr. Parasar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for
the State submits that there are sufficient incriminating materials against the
accused applicant and therefore, he opposes the granting bail of the accused
applicant. He further submits that the statements of the victim girl as well as
other witnesses make it clear and points a finger clearly towards the guilt of the
accused applicant.
8. Ms. B. Sarma, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 2, on
the other hand, has submitted an affidavit before this Court which is sworn by
the informant wherein it has been stated that the FIR was, in fact, lodged due
to some misunderstandings and confusion immediately after the occurrence of
the aforesaid incident. It was also stated in the Affidavit that she does not have
any objection if this Court allows the accused applicant to go on bail.
9. This Court has heard the submissions made by the learned counsel
Page No.# 4/5
appearing for the respective parties as well as has perused the materials
available in the TCR, which is produced before this Court. This Court has taken
into consideration the medical report that has been attached to the Charge
Sheet filed in the instant case as well as the affidavit that has been produced
before this Court. Another important factor is that this Court while considering
the instant bail has taken into consideration of the fact of the absence of the
Presiding Officer of the Special Court (POCSO), Tinsukia since September, 2025
till date.
10. Considering all the aforesaid factors and also considering the fact that the
accused applicant is also a relative, who is aged about 25 years old, this Court is
of the considered opinion that the privilege of bail should be granted to the
accused applicant at this stage.
11. Accordingly, it is directed that the accused applicant shall be released
forthwith from the judicial custody on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 50,000/-
(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with a surety of like nature to the satisfaction of
the learned Additional Judge-cum-Special Judge (POCSO), Tinsukia, Assam,
subject to the following conditions: -
i. that, the accused shall appear before the learned Trial Court as
and when required during the trial of the case;
ii. that, the accused shall not try to get in connection with the
victim girl or her family, in any manner, during the trial of the case
to influence them in any manner;
iii. that, the accused shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person who may be
acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade such person
Page No.# 5/5
from disclosing such facts before the Investigating Authority.
12. In view of the aforesaid directions, this bail application stands disposed of
as allowed.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
