SAGIR AHMAD Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) While hearing the bail petition of Sagir Ahmad in this application the Court refused to grant bail to said Sagir Ahmad and called for a report from the Sessions Judge as to under what circumstances accused Seth Mian was granted bail in proceeding under Sec. 366 of the Indian Penal Code punishable to rigorous imprisonment for ten years. On a perusal of the records of the case this Court passed an order on 20.3.85 issuing notice to Seth Mian as to why the order granting bail to him be not cancelled: The prosecution case is that some Hindu ladies of the village went to visit a temple and were participating in puja -path, Seth Mian along with a few others came to the temple premises. Seth Mina focussed torch on the faces of the ladies participating in puja -path and picked up a married lady and a young girl from the temple. When the mother of the victim girl, objected to the kidnapping she was assaulted. Seth Mian and others thereafter released the married lady after having looked to the feature but they became traceless with the young girl. From the prosecution case it appears that the main role has been assigned to Seth Miau.

(2.) On 26.2.1977 the bail petition filed on behalf of Sagir Mian and Nanhe Mian, the companions of Seth Mian, was rejected by the Chief Judicial Magistrate as the case appeared to be very serious in nature. On 8.3.1977 Mr. S.M.M. Alam, the then District and Sessions Judge, however, granted bail to Nanhe Mian and Sagir Mian by observing "In my opinion in view of the nature of the allegation made above in the case, the petitioners cannot be legitimately detained in custody". Thereafter an application for grant of bail to Seth Mian was filed in the court of the than Chief Judicial Magistrate Sri Bhagwan Prasad. The Chief Judicial Magistrate by his order dated 28.3.77 granted bail to Seth Mian on the sole reason as observed hereunder :

(3.) Sagir Ahmad jumped bail and he was arrested. He was, however, released on provisional bail by the 5th Additional Sessions Judge and when the matter of the provisional bail came to be affirmed by the District and Sessions Judge, Sri A.B. Prasad, the learned District and Sessions Judge observed as hereunder :