JUDGMENT :

Heard Ms. Kriti Awasthi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Nadim Seraj, learned G.P.5 for the State, Ms. Archana Sinha, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 and Mr. Prabhu Narain Sharma, learned counsel for respondent no. 4.

2. This writ application has been preferred seeking quashing of the order dated 19.02.2020 passed by learned Special Court, Begusarai in POCSO Case No. 3/2020 (arising out of Bakhri P.S. Case No. 58/2020). By the impugned order the learned Special Court has directed release of a minor victim of alleged sexual offences in favour of respondent no. 2 who claims herself the mother of the minor victim.

3. The impugned order has been challenged on various grounds including that of non-compliances with the mandatory provisions of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 1956’), the provisions of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘J.J. Act’) and the provisions of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘POCSO Act’).

4. Petitioner is the informant of Bakhri P.S. Case No. 58/2020. It is on the basis of his confidential information to Begusarai Police that a raid was conducted in a brothel (house of the maternal uncle of the victim) situated at Ismailnagar, Ward No. 8 within the jurisdiction of Bakhri Police Station, in the district of Begusarai. In the said raid conducted on 08.02.2020 by a team headed by the then Dy.S.P. (Headquarter) a girl child aged about 15 years was rescued and the house owner Sunita Devi, wife of Mantun Nutt, son of Anandi Natt and Meera Devi wife of Sunil Nutt were arrested on the spot. They are said to be the relatives of the victim child. Sunita Devi is said to be the Aunt (Mami) of the victim, Mantun Nutt is the uncle (Mama). In course of raid, two empty bottles of wine, medicine of Aids, pregnancy test kits, eleven used condoms and 100 unused condoms as also some money were seized by police.

5. The victim girl disclosed to the Inspector of Police that she was brought in her childhood by one Punam @ Tanuja wife of Mantun Nutt from Patna, she did not remember name of her parents and she further alleged that Sunita Devi, Meera Devi, Punam @ Tanuja and Mantun Nutt were involved in forcibly pushing her in prostitution and they were taking away all the money which were being paid by her customers. On refusal to get involved in prostitution she was being beaten by the accused persons. She disclosed name of another victim girl who had been taken away by Punam Devi at the time of raid. A case under Sections 346/366A/367/370/370A/372/373/ 376/120B of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 4/6/12/17 of POCSO Act, Sections 46/12/17 of the Act of 1956, Sections 75/80/81 of the J.J. Act and Section 37(c) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 was registered.

6. The writ petition further discloses that the statement of the victim girl was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. in which the victim girl disclosed that her maternal uncle had solemnized two marriages and his wives are Sunita and Punam respectively. She further disclosed that when police conducted the raid one person was with her in her room, she did not know the name of that person, she disclosed that people were coming to her and they were establishing physical relationship with her and all these are within the knowledge of her maternal uncle and she was doing it voluntarily. In answer to the Court’s query she further disclosed that right from her childhood nobody came to meet her, her father has died and lastly she made statement that her mother is residing with her for last one month with whom she wanted to go. She disclosed the name of her mother as one Meena Khatoon. Statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded after ten days on 18.02.2020.

7. Ms. Kriti Awasthi, learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court towards the fact that prior to recording of