Vikash Kumar Alias Vikash Kumar Raj Vs the State of Jharkhand

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 607 of 2024

Vikash Kumar @ Vikash Kumar Raj, aged about 23 years, son of Jitan Mahto, resident of Village-Tandiya per Harli, P.O. Harli, P.S. Barkagaon, District-Hazaribag.

¶4

... ... Appellant

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand

¶7

Ajay Ram, S/o Chitan Ram, aged about 45 years, R/o villageHarli, P.O. Harli, P.S. Barkagaon, Hazaribag.

¶8

…… Respondents

¶9

¶10

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR

¶11

-------For the Appellant : Mr. Atma Ram Choudhary, Advocate For the State : Mr. Fahad Allam, APP For the Respondent No.2 : Ms. Sharda Kumari, Advocate

¶12

¶13

Order No. 08/ Dated: 11^th March, 2025

¶14

Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant and learned APP assisted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.2.

¶15

The instant appeal is directed against the order dated 09.08.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Hazaribag in Anticipatory Bail Petition No. 1336/2024, by which the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellant has been rejected in connection with Barkagaon SC/ST P.S. Case No.45 of 2023 registered under Sections 147/148/149/341/ 342/323/325/307/385/448 of I.P.C read with Sections 3(1)(r)/3(1)(s) of SC/ST Act.

¶16

It has been submitted on behalf of the appellant that the gist of the allegations as alleged in the F.I.R. that this appellant along with the co-accused persons had assaulted the son of the informant and also the informant indiscriminately by using abusing languages of the caste and insulting them by alleging against the son of the informantRoshan Kumar who is said to having friendship with the sister of the appellant.

¶17

It is submitted on behalf of the appellant that the entire allegations are false and fabricated and allegations are counter product

¶18

of the earlier case which was instituted by the sister of the appellant against the son of the informant for the offence inter alia punishable under Section 376 of the I.P.C. and 4 of the POCSO Act vide Barkagaon P.S. Case No.37 of 2023 dated 23.01.2023 which is earlier instituted case of the present F.I.R. which has been instituted on 01.02.2023.

¶19

It is further alleged that there is no direct and specific allegation has been attributed against the appellant although the co-accused persons against whom the specific allegations were attributed have been enlarged on bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 09.07.2024 in Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 889 of 2023 (Annexure-3).

¶20

Further, it has also been submitted that there is no slightest allegation of any kind of assault or using abusive languages by taking the name of the caste against the appellant and the entire allegations are against the co-accused persons and therefore, this appellant deserves to get anticipatory bail as no offence under SC/ST Act is made out and relied upon the ruling of “ Hitesh Verma Vs. State of Uttarakhand and Anr., (2020) 10 SCC 710.”

¶21

While on the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail stating that the appellant is involved in the heinous offence under Section 307 along with 3(1)(r)/3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act and therefore, he does not deserves to get anticipatory bail. It is further submitted that date of both the incidents are same and the informant was undergoing treatment and therefore the case has been instituted after the lapse of one month from earlier instituted case by the sister of the appellant under Section 376 of the I.P.C. and 4 of the POCSO Act.

¶22

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of this case.

¶23

In view of the aforesaid persuasive submissions advanced on

¶24

2 Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 607 of 2024

¶25

behalf of the appellant, it is found just and fair to enlarge the appellant on bail in anticipation of his arrest/surrender.

¶26

Accordingly, the order dated 09.08.2024 passed in Anticipatory Bail Petition No. 1336/2024 in connection with Barkagaon SC/ST P.S. Case No.45 of 2023, is hereby quashed and set aside.

¶27

In view thereof, the instant appeal stands allowed.

¶28

In consequence thereof, the appellant named above is directed to be released on bail in anticipation of his arrest/surrender within three weeks on furnishing of bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Special Judge, (SC/ST Act), Hazaribag in connection with Barkagaon SC/ST P.S. Case No.45 of 2023, subject to the condition that the appellant will cooperate in the trial, failing which, appropriate order shall be passed by the learned trial Court for the cancellation of anticipatory bail as per the provisions of law.

¶29

Accordingly, the instant appeal stands disposed of

¶30

(Navneet Kumar, J.)

¶31

Basant/Arpit

¶32

3 Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 607 of 2024

Vikash Kumar Alias Vikash Kumar Raj v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikash Kumar Alias Vikash Kumar Raj v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pappu Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rahul Mandal @ Rahul Kumar Mandal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Birendra Sinha Alias Birendra Prasad Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dilip Pathak Alias Dilip Kumar Pathak Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shibu Mahto Alias Shivshankar Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand

Hemant Kumar Alias Hemant Saw Vs the State of Jharkhand