Allowed

Keshav Sao Alias Keshav Sahu v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC6 Aug 2021Cr.A(SJ)/99/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Appeal against rejection of anticipatory bail. Court granted bail citing dispute over a village pathway and reliance on Apex Court judgment in Hitesh Verma case, directing surrender within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted to appellants to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bond of Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties of like amount upon surrender.

Keshav Sao Alias Keshav Sahu Vs the State of Jharkhand — Caste Atrocities | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 99 of 2021

¶2

....

¶3

Keshav Sao @ Keshav Sahu @ Keso Sao

¶4

Anand Sao @ Anand Kumar

¶5

Guddu Sao @ Guddu Sahu

¶6

Bablu Sao @ Bablu Sahu .… Appellants

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Jharkhand

¶9

Mana Bhagat .... Respondents

¶10

.... CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

¶11

For the Appellants : Mr. Tanya Singh, Adv. For the State : Mr. N.K.Ganjhu, APP For the Respondent No.2 : Mr. Gautam Rakesh, Adv.

¶12

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.

¶13

06/06.08.2021 The present application has been filed under Section 14(A) of the

¶14

Schedule Castes/Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the State

¶16

as well as learned counsel for the respondent No.2-victim.

¶17

This criminal appeal has been filed against the order dated 01.02.2021 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Lohardaga in A.B.P. No.216 of 2016 arising out of Lohardaga SC/ST P.S. Case No.12 of 2020 for the offence under Sections 147/ 148/ 149/ 341/ 447/ 504/ 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(g), 3(r) & 3(s) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act by which prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants have been rejected.

¶18

Learned counsel for the appellants by referring to the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Hitesh Verma Vrs. State of Uttarakhand reported in 2020 (10) SCC 710 has submitted that although offence has been reported under the SC/ST (PoA) Act but since the reason for dispute is the land and as such the appellants may be given the benefit of Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.

¶19

It has been further submitted that the land in question is a way to the village as it is evident from the report of the Circle Officer, Kudu dated 21.08.2020, which has been annexed as Annexure-2 of the memo of appeal. This fact has not been disputed in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the victim. Thus, as per the report of the Circle Officer, this is a road/pathway. On above facts, prayer for anticipatory bail has been made.

¶20

On the other hand, learned APP and learned counsel for the victim has opposed the prayer and submitted that there is direct allegation of abusing the member of SC/ST and as such the appellants are not entitled for privilege of

¶21

Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. as because the bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST (POA) Act will be applicable.

¶22

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of records, it appears that there is a dispute between the parties over a piece of land, which is as per the appellants is a path way which also gets support from the report of the Circle Officer, Kudu which has been not disputed by the victim also.

¶23

Considering the nature of dispute, I am inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the appellants. Accordingly, 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 the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Lohardaga in Lohardaga SC/ST P.S. Case No.12 of 2020 on the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C., subject to condition that the appellants will submit self-attested photocopy of their Aadhar Card and also submit their mobile number before the learned court below which they will always keep active and will not change it during pendency of this case without prior permission of the court.

¶24

Accordingly, instant criminal appeal is allowed.

¶25

(Rajesh Kumar, J.)

¶26

Shahid/

Keshav Sao Alias Keshav Sahu v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Keshav Sao Alias Keshav Sahu 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rahul Paswan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sameer Khan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mamita Dwivedy Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ashwini Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sameer Dang Vs the State of Jharkhand

Amit Kumar Mehta Alias Amit Kumar Mehra Alias Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand