IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.3661 of 2011 MD. PARWEZ @ PARWEZ ALAM Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR -------- 02/ 18.03.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Addl. P.P. for the State. I am shocked to see the impugned order because admittedly, impugned order has been passed by the Judicial Officer who was exercising the power of Additional Sessions Judge at the time of passing of the order. Petitioner is not named in the first information report and admittedly, he was not caught by the informant on the alleged date of the occurrence. It appears from perusal of the first information report that the informant raided the house of one Mustafa on 18.5.2010 and recovered three minor girls from the aforesaid house and also arrested aforesaid Mustafa. Admittedly, at the time of aforesaid raid neither petitioner nor so-called victim Sangita Khatoon were apprehended by the informant. It appears from perusal of the record that victim girl was produced before the court on 21.9.2010 i.e. after four months of the alleged occurrence and her statement under section 164 of the Cr.P.C was recorded. The victim disclosed her age as 19 years and the learned Magistrate also assessed her age as 18 years. The victim very clearly stated that she had solemnized marriage with the petitioner but in spite of the aforesaid fact, learned Addl. Sessions Judge rejected the prayer for bail of the petitioner, who is languishing in jail custody since - 2 - 20.9.2010. Let petitioner, Md Parwez @ Parwez Alam, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Araria in Forbesganj P.S. Case no. 140 of 2010. Before parting with the order, I would like to mention here that the learned Addl. Sessions Judge/ In-charge be careful in future while dealing with the bail applications because bail application involves the question of personal liberty of a person. shahid (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J)