Dismissed

Sanjeev Anand @ Bholu Singh v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC11 Sept 2018CR. APP (SJ)/3095/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the bail application by a single judge of a Criminal Appeal under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 against the refusal of regular bail. The court refused bail due to the nature of allegations and available material. The trial was expedited for completion within nine months.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for regular bail was refused; appeal against refusal stands dismissed.

Sanjeev Anand @ Bholu Singh Vs The State Of Bihar — Caste Atrocities | Patna HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.3095 of 2018

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-20 Year-2018 Thana- KHUSRUPUR District- Patna

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Sanjeev Anand @ Bholu Singh, Son of Vinod Kumar Singh, resident of Village- Baikthpur (Rajput Tola), P.S.- Khusrupur, District- Patna.

¶5

... ... Appellant/s Versus The State of Bihar. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Lakshmi Kant Sharma For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan ======================================================

¶6

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT

¶7

Date : 11-09-2018

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶9

This is an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as the “SC/ST Act”) against the refusal of prayer for regular bail vide order dated 25.07.2018 passed by the learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. (P.O.A.) Act-cumAdditional Sessions Judge-V, Patna in Special Case No.57 of 2018, arising out of Khusrupur Police Station Case No.20 of 2018 registered under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 3(I)(r)/3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

¶10

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3095 of 2018 dt.11-09-2018 2/2

¶11

According to F.I.R., the appellant is main assailant of the deceased and informant is an eyewitness of the occurrence. The appellant is in custody since 07.02.2018.

¶12

Submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that in fact the informant is not an eyewitness of the occurrence, rather he has concocted the story after noticing the dead body of the victim brother. No eyewitness has supported the allegation before the Police.

¶13

Considering the nature of allegation and material against the appellant, I am not inclined to enlarge the appellant, above named, on bail for the present. Hence, his prayer is refused.

¶14

The learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same preferably within nine months.

¶15

Accordingly, this appeal stands dismissed.

¶16

(Birendra Kumar, J)

¶17

abhishek/-

¶18

AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date Transmission Date

Sanjeev Anand @ Bholu Singh v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjeev Anand @ Bholu Singh v. The State Of Bihar

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

Shanti Devi Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Mumtaj Ali Vs The Union Of India and Ors.

Nirpendra Yadav @ Nirpendra Kumar Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Raj Kumar Singh and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Ashok Singh and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Mahabali Miya Vs The State Of Bihar