Hazrat Belal vs State Of Jharkhand

Heard the parties through video conferencing. Mr. Rohan Mazumdar- learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects pointed out

by the stamp reporter within two weeks after the lockdown is over.

In view of personal undertaking given by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter are ignored for the

present.

Apprehending his arrest in connection with Pakur (M) P.S. Case No.64 of 2020 instituted under Section 366A of the Indian Penal Code and Sections

4 and 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privileges of

anticipatory bail.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was instrumental in enticing away

the minor victim girl who is the daughter of the informant. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is then submitted that in

her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the victim has not attributed any role of the petitioner is the in aprt of the entire occurrence and the

main allegation is against the co-accused Azmir Sheikh. It is also submitted that though the witnesses have stated that they saw the petitioner also

accompanying the victim and the co- accused Azmir Sheikh but the same is falsified by the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164

Cr.P.C. It is then submitted that the main allegation is against the co-accused Azmir Sheikh. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been implicated

in this case only because he is the brother-in-law (Bahnoi) of the co-accused Azmir Sheikh. It is further submitted that the petitioner undertakes that

he will not disturb or annoy the informant or any of his family members in any manner during the pendency of the case. It is lastly submitted that the

petitioner is ready and willing to co- operate with the investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privileges of

anticipatory bail.

Learned A.P.P appearing for the State being assisted by the learned counsel for the informant oppose the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

Considering the submissions of learned counsels and the facts and circumstances stated above, I am inclined to grant privileges of anticipatory bail to

the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Spl. Judge, POCSO, Pakur

within six weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrendering, he will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty

five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Spl. Judge, POCSO, Pakur in

connection with Pakur (M) P.S. Case No.64 of 2020 with the condition that he will co- operate with the investigation of the case and appear before

the investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that he will

not change his mobile number during the pendency of the case and he will not disturb or annoy the informant or any of his family members in any

manner during the pendency of the case and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.