Dismissed

Kabir Khan And Ors. v. The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Jharkhand HC2 Apr 2018Cr.A(SJ)/2112/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal appeal challenged the rejection of a prayer for anticipatory bail. The High Court held that Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act bars the grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for offences punishable under Section 3(1)(r) of the Act. The appeal was dismissed as it was without merit, and the impugned order was confirmed.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed; the order rejecting anticipatory bail dated 08.11.2017 was confirmed.

Kabir Khan And Ors. Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr. — Caste Atrocities | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.2112 of 2017

¶2

------

¶3

Kabir Khan 2. Tipu Khan 3. Sulekha Bibi .... .... …. Appellants Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Chinta Devi .... .... .... Respondents ------

¶4

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶5

------ For the Appellants : Mr. P. K. Chatterjee, Advocate For the State : Addl.P.P. For the Respondent No.2 : Mr. Arun Kr., Advocate ------

¶6

Order No.03 Dated- 02.04.2018

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the State being assisted by the learned counsel for the respondent No.2.

¶8

This appeal has been preferred by the appellants being aggrieved by the order dated 08.11.2017 passed in A.B.P. No.2408 of 2017 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum Spl. Judge, Dhanbad in connection with C.P. Case No.3168 of 2016 (S.C./S.T. No.63 of 2017) registered under Section 452, 387, 420, 406, 307, 323, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section ¾ of SC/ST Act (cognizance taken under sections 341, 323, 379 of the Indian Penal Code and section 3 (1) (r) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, whereby and where under the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum Spl. Judge, Dhanbad rejected their prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the learned court below failed to take note of the fact that respondent No.2 took a friendly loan from the appellant No.3 namely Sulekha Bibi for which an agreement was prepared between them and that a legal notice was sent before filing of the present case and the learned court below also failed to take note of the fact that after receiving the legal notice by the respondent No.2, this false case has been filed by the respondent No.2. Hence, it is submitted that the impugned order be set aside and the appellants be given the privileges of anticipatory bail.

¶10

Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State being assisted by the respondent No.2 opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants

¶11

and defended the impugned order and submitted that there is direct allegation against the appellants for committing the offence punishable under Section 3 (1) (r) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Hence, in view of Section 18 of the said Act which bars the applicability of section 438 of Cr.P.C., the learned court below has rightly rejected the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants and there being no illegality in the impugned order, this appeal being without any merit be dismissed.

¶12

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that this is not a fit case where the appellants be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. Hence, there being no illegality in the impugned order, this appeal being without any merit is dismissed and the order dated 08.11.2017 passed in A.B.P. No.2408 of 2017 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum Spl. Judge, Dhanbad in connection with C.P. Case No.3168 of 2016 (S.C./S.T. No.63 of 2017) is confirmed.

¶13

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶14

Animesh/

Kabir Khan And Ors. v. The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kabir Khan And Ors. v. The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

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

Kanchan Pandey Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Md Shafiquee Alam Alias Md Safique And Ors. Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Lakha Singh Vs State of Jharkhand

Anand Prasad Mehta Alias Anat Prasad Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Sukhdeo Prasad Yadav Alias Sukar Yadav And Ors. Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Rinku Singh Amrika Singh Vs State of Jharkhand

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Kanchan Pandey Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Md Shafiquee Alam Alias Md Safique And Ors. Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Lakha Singh Vs State of Jharkhand

Anand Prasad Mehta Alias Anat Prasad Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Sukhdeo Prasad Yadav Alias Sukar Yadav And Ors. Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Rinku Singh  Amrika Singh Vs State of Jharkhand

Rinku Singh Amrika Singh Vs State of Jharkhand