Md. Sajid @ Sajid Ali v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50157 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-581 Year-2023 Thana- SAHEBGANJ District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Md. Sajid @ Sajid Ali Son of Late Md. Lalbabu Mansuri @ Lal Baboo Resident of Village - Minapur, P.S.- Sahebganj, District - Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Md. Nezamuddin Son of Late Daud Resident of Village - Minapur, P.S.- Sahebganj, District - Muzaffarpur.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Alok Kumar Alok, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Tarun Prasad Mandal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 10-10-2025 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sahebganj P.S. Case No. 581/2023, registered for the offence under Sections 363, 366(A) of the Indian Penal Code and later on added Sections 6/7 of the POCSO Act.

3. The accused/petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and is in custody since 30.08.2024.

4. The allegation against the petitioner is to kidnap the minor daughter of the informant aged about 17 years, for the purpose of illicit

2/4 intercourse/marriage with another person.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that statement of victim qua her kidnapping is different while recording her statement under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C., and under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. It is also pointed out that while recording her statement under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. it is categorically stated that she left home out of her own sweet will for one of her maternal uncle's home in Deoria, UP and she not even named this petitioner, but while recording her statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. victim stated that this petitioner eloped her on pretext of providing job. It is also pointed out that allegation of penetrative sexual assault/rape is available against co-accused Dhanoj Kumar, who has already granted bail by this Court through Cr. Misc. No. 74453 of 2024 dated 18.09.2025.

It is further submitted that petitioner remains in custody for more than one year and still matter is pending for examination of prosecution witnesses.

3/4 man of clean antecedent.

6. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State, opposes the prayer for bail.

7. Despite of service of notice, none appeared on behalf of the informant.

8. Considering the aforesaid factual submissions and by taking note of fact as statement of victim qua crime in question appears contradictory as discussed aforesaid, where allegation of penetrative sexual assault/rape is not available against this petitioner, coupled with the fact as petitioner remains in custody since 30.08.2024, where trial of this case is not likely to conclude within preferred time line as provisioned under Section 35(2) of the POCSO Act, accordingly, petitioner above named, is directed to be released on bail in connection with Sahebganj P.S. Case No. 581/2023 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Court, POCSO III, Muzaffarpur/concerned Court, subject to the conditions as mentioned under Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C./Section 480(3) of BNSS. (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.) S.Tripathi/-

4/4 U T