Allowed¶23

Seraj Ali @ Sherbaj Ali v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC22 Jul 2025CR. MISC./3585/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Seraj Ali @ Sherbaj Ali bail; Patna High Court; CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3585 of 2025; decided 22-07-2025; Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.; Bhitaha P.S. Case No. 204 of 2023; West Champaran; POCSO Act Section 35(2) speedy trial; Section 164 Cr.P.C. tutoring of victim; IPC Sections 363, 366A, 376, 120B; POCSO Act Sections 4 and 8; bail bond Rs.10,000/-; Section 437(3) Cr.P.C.; Section 480(3) BNSS; custody since 06.07.2024; charge not framed.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail in Bhitaha P.S. Case No. 204 of 2023 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, West Champaran/concerned Court, subject to conditions under Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C./Section 480(3) of BNSS. ¶23

Seraj Ali @ Sherbaj Ali Vs The State of Bihar — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, named in the F.I.R. and in custody since 06.07.2024 in Bhitaha P.S. Case No. 204 of 2023, should be released on bail.

¶13

Court's answer

Tutoring of the victim before recording her statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. prima facie cannot be ruled out, as she admittedly remained with her uncle for long six days before the statement was recorded.

¶23

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner's detention for more than one year (since 06.07.2024) without framing of charge by the learned trial court prima facie defeats his right to speedy trial available under Section 35(2) of the POCSO Act.

¶23

Key takeaways

The petitioner is directed to be released on bail in Bhitaha P.S. Case No. 204 of 2023 on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to the conditions under Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C./Section 480(3) of BNSS.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted — Bhitaha P.S. Case No. 204 of 2023, P.S. Bhitaha, District West Champaran (chargesheet under Sections 363, 366A, 376, 120B IPC and Sections 4 & 8 POCSO Act) — petitioner in custody since 06.07.2024 — charge not framed by the trial court despite custody of more than one year — Court held that tutoring of the victim before her Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement prima facie cannot be ruled out, she having remained with her uncle for six days, and that prolonged incarceration without framing of charge prima facie defeats the right of speedy trial under Section 35(2) of the POCSO Act — petitioner directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to conditions under Section 437(3) Cr.P.C./Section 480(3) BNSS — Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3585 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-204 Year-2023 Thana- BHITAHA District- West Champaran

¶3

====================================================== Seraj Ali @ Sherbaj Ali S/O Molazim Miyan @ Molazim Husain, Resident of Village- Brit Badahara (Muradih), Ward No.-7, P.S.- Bhitaha, District-West Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Bihar.

¶6

Taiyab Ali S/O Abdul Gaffar, R/O Village- Rehara, P.S- Bhitaha, Distt.West Champaran.

¶7

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶8

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Alexander Ashok, Advocate Mr. Jawed Akhtar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anuj Kumar Shrivastava, APP For the Informant : Mr. Sharad Kumar Verma, Advocate ======================================================

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶10

6 22-07-2025

¶11

Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and

¶12

learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

¶13

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Bhitaha P.S. Case No. 204 of 2023 registered for the offence under Sections 366A, 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code but chargesheet was submitted under Sections 363, 366A, 376, 120B of the Indian penal Code and Section 4 and 8 of POCSO Act.

¶14

The accused/petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and is in custody since 06.07.2024.

¶15

Allegation against petitioner is to kidnap the minor daughter of the informant, aged about 17 years for the purpose of illicit intercourse or to seduced/forced her to enter into marriage with another person.

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3585 of 2025(6) dt.22-07-2025 2/3

¶17

Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the daughter of the informant was in love affairs with petitioner and out of her sweet will, they accompanied together and went up to Pune. It is submitted that victim admittedly returned back with her uncle from Pune and for long six days, she was with him before recording her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. and, therefore, tutoring cannot be ruled out. It is submitted that medical report is nowhere corroborating the allegation that rape was committed upon victim. It is submitted that in this case even till now charge was not framed by the learned trial court despite of the fact that petitioner is in custody since more than one year which appears prima facie defeating the provisions of speedy trial as available in Act itself under Section 35(2) of the POCSO Act. Petitioner is said to be a man of clean antecedent.

¶18

Heard learned APP appearing for the State.

¶19

Mr. Sharad Kumar Verma, learned counsel appearing

¶20

for informant, while opposing bail submitted that the victim was born on 11.06.2007 as per her Bihar School Examination Board Certificate and, therefore, she was between age group of 16-17 years at the time of occurrence. It is also submitted by Mr. Verma that victim categorically stated in her statement that rape was

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3585 of 2025(6) dt.22-07-2025 3/3

¶22

committed upon her by this petitioner on 2-3 occasions during 20 days of her stay with petitioner at Pune.

¶23

Considering the facts and circumstances and by taking note of fact as tutoring of victim before recording her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. prima facie cannot be ruled out as admittedly she was for long six days with her uncle coupled with the fact that petitioner is in custody since more than one year i.e. 06.07.2024, where even charge could not framed by learned trial court which appears prima facie defeating right of speedy trial of petitioner as available under Section 35(2) of the POCSO Act itself, accordingly, petitioner above named, is directed to be released on bail in connection with Bhitaha P.S. Case No. 204 of 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 Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, West Champaran/concerned Court, subject to the conditions as mentioned under Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C./Section 480(3) of BNSS.

¶24

(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)

¶25

veena/-

¶26

U T

Seraj Ali @ Sherbaj Ali v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Seraj Ali @ Sherbaj Ali 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

Sudhanshu Singh @ Sudhanshu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Vikesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Tehzeeb Ansari Vs The State of Bihar

Raghbendra Jha @ Raghubendra Jha Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Ali @ Md. Ojib Vs The State of Bihar

Ramanand Yadav @ Mojo Yadav Vs The State of Bihar