Allowed

Kalsi Devi v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC13 Aug 2021Cr.A(SJ)/318/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an appeal against rejection of anticipatory bail in a caste atrocity case. The court found a dispute over boundary land led to false implication of female family members. It ruled Section 18 of the SC/ST Act did not apply and extended bail with conditions to submit Aadhar and mobile details.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail extended to appellants to surrender within four weeks; bond of Rs.10,000 each with sureties; conditions for Aadhar submission and active mobile number.

Kalsi Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand — Caste Atrocities | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

- 1 -

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.318 of 2020

¶3

1. Kalsi Devi

¶4

2. Meena Devi …… Appellants

¶5

Versus

¶6

1. The State of Jharkhand

¶7

2. Daso Besra ….. Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

¶9

For the Appellants : Mr. Kamdeo Pandey, Advocate For the State : Mr. Suraj Verma, A.P.P For the Resp. No.02 : None ---------

¶10

The matter was taken up through Video Conferencing. Learned counsel for the parties had no objection with it and submitted that the audio and video qualities are good.

¶11

---------

¶12

05/Dated: 13th August, 2021

¶13

1. This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 27.02.2020, passed by the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge – I, Giridih, in A.B.P. No.258 of 2020, in connection with Gawan P.S. Case No.53 of 2014, corresponding to G.R. No.1024 of 2014, registered under Sections 147/ 148/ 149/ 323/ 324/ 504/ 379/ 387 of the Indian Penal Code, and Sections 3(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (For short the SC/ ST Act), whereby the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, to the appellants, has been rejected. Now, the case is pending before the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Giridih.

¶14

2. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned A.P.P.

¶15

3. Nobody appears on behalf of respondent No.02 in spite of filing the vakalatnama on behalf of the victim/ respondent No.02.

¶16

4. It appears that there is dispute between the parties with respect to construction of boundary wall over a piece of land upon which one Churaman Sao is claiming his right. From perusal of the F.I.R., it appears that the entire family members, including the female members, have been made

¶17

- 2 -

¶18

accused. The nature of offence and the existing dispute between the parties, suggests that false implication of these female appellants cannot be ruled out.

¶19

In view of the above facts, the bar of Section 18 of the SC/ ST Act will not attract as it appears to be misuse of the protective act against the female members. Accordingly, I am inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the appellants. The appellants are directed to surrender in the court below within four weeks from the date of receipt/ production of the copy of this order and in the event of their arrest or surrender, they shall be enlarged on bail on their furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, SC/ ST Act, Giridih, in connection with Gawan P.S. Case No.53 of 2014, corresponding to G.R. No.1024 of 2014, on the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C, and also to the condition that the appellants will submit self-attested photocopy of their Aadhar Card and also submit their mobile numbers before the learned court below which they will always keep active and will not change it during pendency of the case without prior permission of the court.

¶20

5. In the result, the appeal is, hereby, allowed.

¶21

(Rajesh Kumar, J.)

¶22

Chandan/-

Kalsi Devi v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kalsi Devi 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

Anand Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rupesh Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rahul Mandal Alias Rahul Kumar Mandal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ramjanam Prajapati Vs the State of Jharkhand

Arti Sharma Vs the State of Jharkhand

Raju Prasad Keshri Alias Raj Kumar Keshri Vs the State of Jharkhand