Md. Aslam @ Asalam Vs The State of Bihar

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Harsh Anuj, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Mushtaque Alam, A.P.P. ======================================================

¶13

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶14

3 23-04-2025

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶16

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Basantpur P.S. Case No. 736 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143(1), 145, 98, 3(5) of B.N.S. and Section 8 of the POCSO Act and Section 75, 79 of J.J. Act and Section 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the I.T.P. 1956 and 16, 17 and 18 of Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976.

¶17

3. The prosecution case in short is that police on a letter dated 08.01.2024 of an NGO conducted a raid at two orchestra company and found that the proprietor of one of the company Md. Akshay had locked four minor girls while another proprietor Md. Aslam (petitioner) had locked four minor girls in

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12580 of 2025(3) dt.23-04-2025 2/3

¶19

his room. The girls were recovered and the police forward the two arrested persons including the petitioner to custody.

¶20

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and has not committed any offecne as stated in the FIR. Learned counsel further submits that from perusal of the Annexure-2, it would suffice that the girls as well as their guardians have filed a compromise petition before the Court below stating therein that the prosecution story is false and the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel further submits that even during the investigation, the recovered girls had not supported the prosecution case in their statements given under Section 164 Cr.P.C. as well as under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Lastly, it has been submitted that the petitioner carries clean antecedent and he is in custody since 23.11.2024.

¶21

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has stated that the petitioner is involved in making minor girls work in his orchestra and hence, he should not be enlarged on bail.

¶22

6. Considering the aforesaid submissions made by the parties and taking into account the fact that the victim girl and their guardian they both have not supported the prosecution

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12580 of 2025(3) dt.23-04-2025 3/3

¶24

case, have filed a petition before the Court below of compromise and also the fact that the girls during investigation, have also given statement that the petitioner was not in any way involved in the alleged crime, I am inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of regular bail.

¶25

7. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is allowed.

¶26

8. Let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail

¶27

on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the court of learned Exclusive Court of POCSO, Siwan, in connection with Basantpur P.S. Case No. 736 of 2024.

¶28

(Sourendra Pandey, J)

¶29

Siwani/-

¶30

U T

Md. Aslam @ Asalam v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Aslam @ Asalam v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Surya Narayan Yadav Vs the State of Bihar

Sanjay Kumar Singh @ Sanjay Singh @ Bablu Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Sonu Vs The State of Bihar

Mantut Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Shankar Sahni Vs The State of Bihar

Ravi Kumar @ Chhotu Kumar @ Suraj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar