The High Court allowed an appeal under the SC/ST Act refusing bail. Setting aside the lower court's refusal, bail was granted to the appellant with conditions and a bond of Rs. 20,000.
Impugned order of bail refusal set aside; appellant released on bail against bond of Rs.20,000 with two sureties.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.2976 of 2018
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -72 Year- 2017 Thana -TANDWA District- AURANGABAD
===========================================================
.... .... Appellant/s
Versus
.... .... Respondent/s
=========================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Manish Kumar No.2, Adv For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, SPP
=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 13-09-2018
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
This is an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the refusal of prayer for bail by order dated 19.07.2018 in Tandwa P.S.Case No.72 of 2017 passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cumSpecial Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Aurangabad, registered under Sections 302,201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
It appears that similarly situated co-accused Rajendra Singh and Sikesh Singh have been allowed anticipatory bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2976 of 2018 dt.13-09-2018
2/2
at Annexure-2.
Considering the aforesaid facts, let the appellant, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court-below where the case is pending in connection with the aforesaid case, with condition that both bailors shall be resident of territorial jurisdiction of the learned court below and further the appellant shall fully cooperate with the investigation/trial of the case, failing which the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bond of the appellant.
Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and this appeal stands allowed.
(Birendra Kumar, J)
Nitesh/-
| AFR/NAFR | NAFR |
|---|---|
| CAV DATE | NA |
| UploadingDate | 14.09.2018 |
| Transmission Date |
14.09.2018 |
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the appellant considering the refusal of bail by the lower court and antecedents.
Whether the appellant is entitled toEqual bail like similarly situated co-accused.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Binda Singh
The State of Bihar
BIRENDRA KUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
