Jharkhand HC grants bail to man who claimed he was framed after he objected to loud music on train

The Jharkhand High Court has granted bail to a software engineer, who was arrested last year on a woman’s complaint that he had touched her inappropriately while she was traveling on a train [Md. Sajjad Ali vs The State Of Jharkhand].

Justice Rajesh Shankar took note of the accused Md Sajjad Ali’s assertion that he was booked in the case only for objecting to the playing of loud music during night hours by the complainant and her friends.

“Having heard learned counsel for the parties, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount, each, to the satisfaction of learned Railway Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jamshedpur in connection with Tatanagar Rail P.S. Case No.102 of 2025,” the Court said.

The accused was booked under Section 76 (assault or use of criminal force to woman with intent to disrobe) and 79 (word, gesture or act intended to insult modesty of a woman) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) on the complainant’s statement that he had touched her breast inappropriately while she was sleeping. 

However, counsel representing the accused submitted that he was falsely implicated in the case. The Court was told that on the date of the alleged occurrence, Ali was travelling in the Hawrah-Ranchi Express. His counsel added that the victim, along with her friends, was travelling in the same train.

Ali's counsel added that the victim and her friends were perhaps stage dancers who were going to perform for a Durga Puja programme. He alleged that his client was falsely implicated in the crime only because he asked them to stop playing loud music at night.

He argued that although there was an altercation between Ali and the victim and her friends, the claim that Ali touched the victim inappropriately was false.

The Court was further told that the accused is a software engineer in Kolkata and has no criminal antecedents. He has been in judicial custody since September 29, 2025 and deserves bail, it was submitted.

Though the prosecution opposed the bail plea, the Court ordered the release of the accused. The bail order does not deal with the merit of the allegations levelled by the complainant.

A Jamshedpur court in November 2025 had rejected the bail plea, observing that the allegations against the accused were serious and that the investigation was at an initial stage.

Advocate Pran Pranay represented the petitioner/ accused man.

Additional Public Prosecutor Vandana Bharti appeared for the State.

[Read Order]