Allowed

Sharad Chandra Mishra Alias Sharad Chandra v. The State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC11 Jun 2018Cr.A(SJ)/2040/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand allowed the appeal against the rejection of anticipatory bail by the Additional Sessions Judge. Finding the impugned order unsustainable in law, the Court set it aside and directed the appellant to surrender within four weeks to be enlarged on bail upon depositing victim compensation and furnishing a bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order rejecting anticipatory bail was set aside; the appellant was granted bail upon surrendering within four weeks, depositing Rs. 10,000 as victim compensation, and furnishing a bail bo

Sharad Chandra Mishra Alias Sharad Chandra Vs The State… — Caste Atrocities | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.2040 of 2017

¶2

------

¶3

Sharad Chandra Mishra @ Sharad Chandra @ Sharat Chandra

¶4

.... .... …. Appellant

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand 2. Kailash Das .... .... .... Respondents ------

¶7

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶8

------ For the Appellant : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate For the State : Addl.P.P. For the Respondent No.2 : None ------

¶9

Order No.07 Dated- 11.06.2018

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Addl. P.P. for the State.

¶11

Though notice has been served upon the respondent No.2 and an affidavit has been filed to this effect by the ‘pairvikar’ of the appellant but no one turns up on behalf of respondent No.2 in spite of repeated calls.

¶12

This appeal has been preferred by the appellant being aggrieved by the order dated 02.11.2017 passed in A.B.P. No.770 of 2017 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Deoghar in connection with (SC/ST Case No.89 of 2016) Kunda P.S. Case No.69 of 2015 corresponding to G.R. No.1681 of 2015 registered under Section 341, 323, 379 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, whereby and where under the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Deoghar rejected his prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶13

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned court below failed to take note of the fact that neither there is averment in the written report that the appellant is not a member of the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes nor it is mentioned that the alleged occurrence took place in any place within public view, hence, no offence punishable under the penal provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is made out against the appellant. It is further submitted that the allegations against the appellant are false and

¶14

the appellant is ready and willing to pay Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) as ad interim victim compensation to the informant-victimrespondent No.2 of this case namely Kailash Das by way of demand draft without prejudice to his defence in this case. Hence, it is submitted that the impugned order be set aside and the appellant be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶15

Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State opposed the prayer and defended the impugned order.

¶16

Considering the facts of the case, this Court is of the considered view that this is a fit case where the appellant be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 02.11.2017 passed in A.B.P. No.770 of 2017 by the learned Additional Sessions JudgeI, Deoghar, being not sustainable in law is set aside and the appellant named above is directed to surrender before the court below within four weeks from the date of this order. In case of the appellant being arrested or surrendering in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Deoghar, within the stipulated time, he will be enlarged on bail depositing a demand draft of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand) as ad interim victim compensation drawn in favour of the informant-victimrespondent No.2 of this case namely Kailash Das and on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Deoghar in connection with (SC/ST Case No.89 of 2016) Kunda P.S. Case No.69 of 2015 corresponding to G.R. No.1681 of 2015.

¶17

In case the appellant deposits the demand draft the learned court below is directed to issue notice to the informant-victim-respondent No.2 of this case namely Kailash Das and hand over the demand draft to him forthwith on proper identification.

¶18

This appeal stands allowed.

¶19

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶20

Animesh/

Sharad Chandra Mishra Alias Sharad Chandra v. The State Of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sharad Chandra Mishra Alias Sharad Chandra v. The State Of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Most Sahodri Devi Vs Lilawati Devi and Anr.

Mani Sahu Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dhaneshwar Sao Vs the Chairman Cum Managing Director Central Coal Fields Limited and Ors.

Jamila Khatoon Vs Noor Hassan Khan And Ors.

Ram Prasad Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pritam Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand