Manjoor Khaliffa v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53150 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-844 Year-2023 Thana- SITAMARHI District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Manjoor Khaliffa, Son of Late Shankar Khaliffa, R/o village - Boha Tola, Ward No.- 9, P.S. and District - Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ashok Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Shantanu Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 02-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The accused/petitioner is named in the FIR and apprehending his arrest in connection with Sitamarhi P.S. Case No.844 of 2023 registered under Sections 365, 363, 366A, 370, 370A, 372, 373, 376, 120B read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 of the Immoral Traffic Act, Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act as well as Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act.
3. As per FIR, the police, upon secret information supplied by one N.G.O., raided the house of petitioner, from
2/4 where three minor girls were recovered with allegation that they were forced to join immoral traffic/flesh trading.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for petitioner that out of three minor girls, two are daughters of petitioner and one is a maid. It is pointed out that on the same very day, the raid was conducted in several houses and out of confusion, the petitioner was also implicated with present case, without having any cogent material. It is submitted that the statement of alleged three minor girls were recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, where two of the victims categorically stated that for nothing they were apprehended by police. It is also pointed out that during raid, both of them have shown their Aadhar card/I-card to the police but, merely on the basis of suspicion, their parents were implicated with present case. It is submitted that another minor girl was maid and while she was returning to her home after completing her job, she was also arrested with same suspicion. It is submitted that in view of the fact as no allegation of sexual assault or to force victims to join alleged flesh trade appears available against
3/4 the petitioner, he deserves bail. In this context, it is also submitted that with similar allegation, the mother of alleged victim girls namely, Nafisa Khatoon was granted anticipatory bail by this Court through Cr. Misc. No.45782 of 2024 dated 04.04.2025.
5. Learned APP opposed the prayer of bail.
6. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by taking note of fact as two of the victim girls are the minor daughter of petitioner, where another girl is maid, where nothing alleged incriminating against the petitioner in terms of statements of victim recorded under Section 164 of CrPC, accordingly, the petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender in the court below within a period of four weeks from today, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Special Judge, POCSO, Sitamarhi in connection with Sitamarhi P.S. Case No.844 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short
4/4 'CrPC')/under Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (in short 'BNSS').
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.) Sanjeet/- U T