The Meghalaya High Court has refused to grant bail to a man accused of sexually assaulting and molesting a minor at a children's home, observing that the accused had allegedly betrayed the trust reposed in him by the children, who regarded him as a grandfather. The Court noted that the material on record prima facie indicated that he had taken advantage of the child's vulnerability.

Justice W.Diengdoh remarked that: “The petitioner had been held in high regard by the children, who fondly referred to him as 'paieid', meaning grandfather. However, he betrayed their trust by taking advantage of the child's vulnerability.”

Background:

The petitioner, Adino Marboh, was arrested on January 18, 2026, in connection with an FIR registered at Mawryngkneng Police Station alleging sexual assault of a minor girl. Following investigation, the police filed a chargesheet alleging offences under various provisions of the POCSO Act read with Section 115 of the BNS.

The Special Judge (POCSO), Shillong thereafter framed charges, and the matter was pending at the stage of recording prosecution evidence when the petitioner approached the Meghalaya High Court seeking bail.

The High Court noted that although the chargesheet had already been filed and the petitioner was no longer required for custodial interrogation, bail could not be considered solely on that ground. The Court held that each case must be examined on its peculiar facts and circumstances.

The Court found that the petitioner was held in high regard by the children of the home and was fondly called “paieid” (grandfather). However, the statements of the survivor and other children prima facie indicated that he had betrayed their trust and taken advantage of the child's vulnerability.

The Court further observed that the statements on record clearly demonstrated prima facie evidence of sexual assault and molestation, and held that such conduct could not be condoned while considering the bail plea.

Regarding the petitioner's contention that the grounds of arrest were not communicated to him, the Court found the State's explanation convincing. The record showed that an intimation of grounds of arrest had been served upon him in Khasi, a language known to him.

In view of these findings, the Court held that the petitioner failed to make out a case for bail and rejected the bail application as devoid of merit.

Case Name: Shri.Adino marboh v/s The State of Meghalaya

Case No.: BA No.62 of 2026

Date of Decision: 14.08.2026

Click Here To Read/Download Order