Patna High CourtCR. REV./519/2017dismissed

Shakila Khatoon v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2018-05-02Mr. Justice Ashutosh Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Revision No.519 of 2017 ===================================== Shakila Khatoon Wife of Akbar Khalifa, Resident of VillageKhuskibagh Katihar More, P.S. Sadar, District- Purnea. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Raj Kumar Sah, Sub Divisional Police Officer, Sadar, Purnea.

.... .... Respondent/s ===================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Prawesh Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sri Nagendra Prasad ===================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 02-05-2018 The petitioner, who claims herself to be the mother of the victim girl, is aggrieved by the order dated 19.07.2016 passed by the learned 1st Additional District & Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Purnea in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No. 88 of 2016, arising out of Special Case No. 22 of 2016, whereby her prayer for releasing the victim girl in her favour, has been rejected.

The records reveal that the F.I.R was lodged by the S.D.P.O. on the basis of the secret information that one Akbar Khalifa is making the young women work as sex labourers. A team was constituted and a raid was conducted in the house of aforesaid Akbar Khalifa. The victim girl viz. Shahin Perween, who is stated to be the daughter of the

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.519 of 2017 (4) dt.02-05-2018 2/2 petitioner and other girls of tender age were recovered. Decidedly, the victim Shahin Perween was not a major when the order impugned was passed. The 164 Cr.P.C statement of the victim girl further lends credence to the allegation that the Akbar Khalifa stands in no special relation to the victim girl who is stated to be the daughter of the petitioner. The petitioner has admitted that she is the wife of the aforesaid Akbar Khalifa.

Under such circumstances, the victim girl ought not to have been released in favour of the petitioner. The learned Court below has rightly passed the order, rejecting the prayer of the petitioner. No good ground has been made out for this Court to interfere with the aforesaid order.

The petition is, therefore, dismissed.

(Ashutosh Kumar, J) Shageer/- U T