ARNAB SEN Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. J.M. Thangkhiew, learned counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) Also heard Ms. Z.E. Nongkynrih, learned GA for the State respondent No. 1.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned orders dtd. 25/2/2025 and 3/3/2025 passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Ri-Bhoi District, Nongpoh in Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1/2025, wherein the petitioner herein had sought for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Women P.S. Case No. 09 (02) 2025 under Sec. 7/8 of the POCSO Act, the same being allowed, however, with certain conditions imposed, for which the petitioner is directed to abide by such conditions. One of the conditions being "iv. The accused person shall not come in proximity of the child pending completion of investigation and disposal of the case". It is precisely for modification or alteration of this condition that the petitioner has now approached this Court with this instant petition, seeking relief, inasmuch as, on the ground that the child i.e. his daughter was residing with him since her birth, and as such, there is no question of any animosity or ill-feeling or even danger to the child, if it so happened that the petitioner comes into contact with her in course of the proceedings before the Trial Court.