Dhiraj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38666 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-921 Year-2024 Thana- JAHANABAD District- Jehanabad ====================================================== Dhiraj Kumar Son of Awadhesh Kumar @ Awadhesh Singh R/o Village - Korauna @ Karauna, Ps- Korauna Dist- Jehanabad ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Mr. Nilesh Kumar Chaurasiya S/O Not Known Posted as Executive Officer/ Magistrate, Jehanabad.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Sunil Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms.Shaheen Begum, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 15-07-2025 Heard Mr.Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.Shaheen Begum, learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Jehanabad Town P.S. Case No. 921 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 21.11.2024 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 144,3(5),61(2) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, Section 3,4,5,6 of Immoral Trafficking Act and Section 8,16 of POCSO Act, 2012.
3. As per the First Information Report, police on secret informant that act of immoral trafficking is going on in Madhuban Guest House, reached there and several girl and boys were apprehended as they were involved in the same.
2/4
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. Initially, the petitioner was not named in the FIR. The name of the petitioner has been transpired during investigation on the basis that the father of the petitioner is alleged to be the owner of one of the Guest House and petitioner has been made accused in the present case merely on the ground that the petitioner is son of co-accused person, namely, Awadhesh Kumar @ Awadhesh Singh and the statement of the victims under Section 164 of Cr. P.C.
/Section 183 of BNSS, 2023 was recorded in which they have not stated anything about the petitioner and co-accused person, namely, Nagendra Kumar @ Dablu @ Dabla, who is Manager of Madhuban Guest House, has been granted privilege of anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 23.04.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.18496 of 2025 and co-accused person, namely, Tinku Kumar has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 20.06.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.22971 of 2025, co-accused persons, namely, Awadhesh Kumar @ Awadhesh Singh and Anish @ Anish Kumar and Bhola Kumar have also been granted privilege of anticipatory bail by this Court vide orders dated 09.07.2025,10.07.2025 and 15.07.
3/4 Cr. Misc. Nos. 23288 of 2025, 35090 of 2025 and 39984 of 2025 respectively.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, on the basis of the material available on the record and the case diary, has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, petitioner has clean antecedent and similarly situated co-accused persons have been granted privilege of anticipatory bail/ regular bail by this Court or by a Coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000 (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Special Judge, POCSO Act, Jehanabad in connection with Jehanabad Town P.S. Case No. 921 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with other following conditions:- (I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court
4/4 and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. (II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
(III) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his/her criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T