Appeal against the refusal of anticipatory bail in a case involving alleged caste-based atrocities. The High Court rejected the bail plea and directed the accused to surrender for regular bail.
Anticipatory bail rejected; appellants directed to surrender within six weeks to seek regular bail.
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.1381 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-76 Year-2018 Thana- SC/ST District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
... ... Appellants.
Versus
The State of Bihar.
... ... Respondent/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Sheo Kumar Prasad For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA JAISWAL
ORAL ORDER
This is an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter in short referred to as the 'SC/ST Act') against the refusal of prayer of anticipatory bail vide order dated 27.02.2019 passed by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge cum Special Judge SC/ST Act, Sitamarhi in connection with SC/ST Case No. 76 of 2018 registered under
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1381 of 2019(4) dt.16-07-2019 2/3
Sections 341, 323, 324, 354 & 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1) (s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Over row of payment of commission of relief fund accorded to the informant all the accused persons descended at his house and slated him in the name of his caste. Appellant Ram Pragas Sah broke his teeth by assaulting him and when his wife came in his rescue appellants tore her blouse and they also spat on his face.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. Appellants have been falsely implicated in the case due to some money transaction. Brring appellant no.2-Ram Pragas Sah who is said to have broken the teeth of the informant by assaulting him, the allegation levelled against other appellants are not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. Appellant nos.1, 4 & 5 happen to be lady. Appellants have no criminal antecedent.
Learned Spl. PP for the State opposed the prayer for bail submitting that all the appellants descending at the door of the informant slated him in the name of his caste and spat on his face beside other doing misdeed. Hence, anticipatory bail is barred under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1381 of 2019(4) dt.16-07-2019 3/3
Considering the facts and circumstances of case, I am not inclined to enlarge the appellants on bail. The prayer for bail of the appellants is hereby rejected. However, the appellants are directed to surrender before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail and the learned Court below would pass order in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order on the very date of
surrender.
Accordingly, this appeal is disposed of.
(Prakash Chandra Jaiswal, J)
Trivedi/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellant is entitled to anticipatory bail given the refusal by the Special Judge under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act.
Whether the appellants fulfilled the requirements to prevent a recurrence of caste-based atrocities.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Indu Devi
Ram Pragas Sah
Rajeev Kumar
Rangeeta Devi
Bhuili Devi
The State of Bihar
Prakash Chandra Jaiswal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
