Saroj Mehta @ Saroj Kumar Mehta v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31239 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-132 Year-2024 Thana- KARJAIN District- Supaul ====================================================== Saroj Mehta @ Saroj Kumar Mehta, aged about 22 years, S/o Chandrayan Mehta, R/o Village- Jagdishpur. Ward No 5, P.S.- Karjain District- Supaul ... ... Petitioner
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
(Hidden) XXX, D/o Vejnath Ram, R/o Vill- Padumnagar, Ward No. 2, P.S.- Karzain, Dist- Supaul ... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mr. Pramod Mishra, Advocate For the State :
Mrs. Sharda Kumari, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 21-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with POCSO Case No. 105 of 2024, arising out of Karjain P.S. Case No. 132 of 2024 dated 03.09.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 76, 78 read with Section 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023, Section 67 of the I.T. Act, Section 8 of the POCSO Act and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(w) of the SC/ST (POA) Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant alleged that the marriage was fixed with the lady but due to economic condition, the in-laws family requested for further time. In the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31239 of 2025(2) dt.21-07-2025 2/3 meantime, the allegation is that the accused persons forced him to call the lady, made them to undress, nude videos were made by the accused, got them paraded to home and forcibly got them married. Later, the videos were put on social electronic media, completely lowering the image of the two victims as also their family members. This led to the F.I.R.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that there is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner and ten other coaccused persons. There is no specific allegation against the petitioner. No incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged offence. There is no any role of the petitioner in the alleged crime. The other co-accused, person, Sanjay Paswan @ Sanjay Kumar, has already been granted bail by a Bench of this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 27845 of 2025 vide order dated 10.07.2025. The petitioner has one criminal antecedent in which he is on bail as stated in paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. The petitioner is in custody in this case since 14.10.2024.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail petition of the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31239 of 2025(2) dt.21-07-2025 3/3
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well the period of custody, let the above named petitioner, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge POCSO Act, Supaul, in connection with POCSO Case No. 105 of 2024, arising out of Karjain P.S. Case No. 132 of 2024 with further condition:- (I) The petitioner is directed to remain physically present before the learned court below on each and every date, failing which on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause, the bail bonds of the petitioner are liable to be cancelled.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) U.K./- U T