Aryan Yadav @ Bhola Pandit v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69486 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-598 Year-2021 Thana- SITAMARHI District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== ARYAN YADAV @ BHOLA PANDIT Son of Kailash Yadav Resident of Village - Hardiya, P.S.- Kavaee, Distt.- Bara (Rohtak), Nepal, Presently residing at Village - Jitna Ghodasahan, P.O.- Jhanjhara, Bankatwa, P.s.- Bankatwa, Distt.-East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Ms.Ranjita Singh, Advocate For the Informant :
None For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Binod Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 21-04-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State, and no one has appeared for the informant. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences under Sections 363, 365, 366A, 370, 370A, 372, 373, 376, 120B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the Immoral Traffic Act, Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act and Sections 75 and 79 of the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 30.07.2021, charge-sheet has been submitted in the case and is a person with clean antecedent. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69486 of 2021(2) dt.21-04-2022 2/3 informant alleges that the petitioner along with other accused persons is entrenched in flesh trade and for that purposes, minor girls have been kidnapped from different areas of Bihar and other parts of the country. Further it is alleged that from the house of Meena Khatoon and other accused persons, several minor victims were recovered who disclosed that the accused persons forcefully made them indulge in flesh trade. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. it would manifest that petitioner at best is alleged to be a customer and as such was not indulging in flesh trade.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that co-accused Meena Khatoon and Heena Khatton have been granted bail by order dated 15.02.2022 in Cr. Misc. No. 53852 of 2021, Nafisa Khatoon has been granted bail by order dated 23.03.2022 in Cr. Misc. No. 62262 of 2021, with a condition that petitioner will be released after framing of charge, Umesh Rai has been granted bail by order dated 15.02.2022 in Cr. Misc. No. 53900 of 2021 and Md. Yusuf has been granted bail by order dated 22.02.2022 in Cr. Misc. No. 54829 of 2021. Learned counsel further submits that all the co-accused have been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69486 of 2021(2) dt.21-04-2022 3/3 granted bail without condition, except Nafisa Khatoon in view of the nature of allegation as alleged against her. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.
Considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 30.07.2021, charge-sheet has been submitted, is a person with clean antecedent, co-accused have been granted bail and taking into consideration the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner 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 learned Court below where the case is pending in connection with Sitamarhi P.S. Case No. 598 of 2021. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishi/- U T