Mukesh Prasad @ Mukesh Kumar Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85156 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-87 Year-2025 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Saran ====================================================== Mukesh Prasad @ Mukesh Kumar Prasad Son of Parshuram Prasad Resident of Vill- Janta Bazar, Lahlaadpur, P.S.- Janta Bazar, Taraiya, Distt.- Saran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Kumari Anupam, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 16-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 79, 111, 141, 143, 145, 98, 296 and 3 (5) of the BNS, section 79 of the JJ Act and Sections 3,4,5 and 6 of the Immoral Traffic (prevention) Act, 1956 and Section 16 of Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the proprietor of Supriya Orchestra and that after raiding his house, two girls were recovered. The girls allegedly disclosed that the petitioner had brought them for dancing in the Orchestra. It is further alleged that they were being forced to perform in obscene video.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85156 of 2025(2) dt.16-12-2025 2/2 petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in connection with the present case. It is further submitted that from perusal of the order of the learned trial Court, it is evident that the learned trial Court has recorded that the recovered girls have given their statement under Section 183 of the BNS wherein they have stated that they were working in the Orchestra. It is further submitted that admittedly, that the petitioner is the proprietor of the Orchestra and has been in judicial custody since 16.10.2025 having no criminal antecedent.

5. Learned APP appearing for the state has opposed the prayer of regular bail.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 87 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Additional Sessions Judge (POCSO), Saran. (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Jagdish/- U T