Vasir Nadav @ Vasire Aalam @ Nasir Aalam @ Wazire Alam @ Wazir Nadaf v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15663 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-28 Year-2024 Thana- SAHIYARA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Vasir Nadav @ Vasire Aalam @ Nasir Aalam @ Wazire Alam @ Wazir Nadaf S/O Yunus Nadaf R/O Village - Madheshara, P.S.- Sonbarsa @ Bhutahi, Dist. - Sitamarhi.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar Bihar 2.

Ajay Kumar Thakur @ Pappu Thakur S/O Radhe Shyam Thakur R/O Village- Fulparasi, Ward No.-13, P.S- Sahiyara, Distt.- Sitamarhi. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Santosh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shailendra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 23-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant Shri Amit Kumar and learned counsel for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Sahiyara P.S. Case No. 28 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 363, 366(A), 379, 420, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 8 of the POCSO Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is accused of establishing relationship with a minor victim by wrongly disclosing his religion and thereafter he took her away and when the girl refused to marry him then he has given her something because of which she fainted and thereafter when she

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15663 of 2025(5) dt.23-07-2025 2/2 gained her consciousness she was at her parental home.

4. The petitioner is in custody since 15.10.2024.

5. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case as he has not done any sexual act with the victim and therefore he may be granted bail.

6. Learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the application of the petitioner for grant of bail and has submitted that the petitioner had taken away the minor victim after making false promise to her.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

9. If the trial of the petitioner is delayed due to the fault of the prosecution then the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) Vikas/- U