High CourtsSingle Bench

Bappan Das vs State Of Meghalaya

Meghalaya High Court · Decided on 22 July 2025 · Citation: (2025) 07 MEG CK 0594

HON’BLE JUDGES
W. Diengdoh, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Protection Of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 9 (p), 10
CASE NUMBER
Anticipatory Bail No. 16 Of 2025
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 379 words

W. Diengdoh, J

Heard Mr. S. Deb, learned counsel for the petitioner, who has submitted that the petitioner whose name figured in an FIR dated 11.07.2025 lodged before the Officer-in-Charge, Laitumkhrah Police Station by one minor girl, wherein it was alleged that the petitioner had molested her and has attempted to rape her. The said FIR was accordingly registered as Laitumkhrah P.S. Case No. 86 (07) 2025 under Section 9 (p)/10 of the POCSO Act, and investigation was launched.

The learned counsel also submits that the petitioner being apprehensive of imminent arrest in connection with the said Laitumkhrah P.S. Case No. 86 (07) 2025, has accordingly approached this Court with a prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.

Mr. N.D. Chullai, learned AAG assisted by Ms. S. Laloo, learned GA has entered appearance on behalf of the State respondent. He submits that this Court vide order dated 03.04.2025 passed in BA. No. 14 of 2025 in the case of Shri. Balbinder Singh v. State of Meghalaya & Ors, has spelt out the procedure for issuance of notice upon a complainant/survivor/victim involved in a case under the POCSO Act, where it has been emphasized that confidentiality of the identity of the said complainant or survivor is to be maintained. However, it is incumbent upon the petitioner to cause notice to be issued upon such complainant/survivor, such notice to be routed through the Investigating Officer. As such, it is prayed that the petitioner may be directed to issue notice upon the complainant/survivor as far as this case is concerned.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has therefore made a prayer that the petitioner may be allowed to take steps accordingly.

The prosecution is directed to ensure that the Investigating Officer filed the compliance report on the next date.

In the meantime, as prayed for by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is allowed to go on interim bail on conditions that he shall not abscond or tamper with the evidence and witnesses, that he shall not be in touch with the survivor until further orders, and that he shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer as and when required.

The prosecution is also directed to produce copy of the case diary on the next date fixed.

List this matter on 31.07.2025.