In this criminal appeal, the Patna High Court set aside an order refusing anticipatory bail. The court allowed the appeal and directed the trial court to release the appellants on bail upon furnishing a bond and sureties within six weeks.
Released on bail by furnishing bond of Rs. 10,000 each with two sureties of similar amount within six weeks.
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.3811 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-4 Year-2015 Thana- SC/ST BAGHA District- West Champaran
======================================================
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Pandey For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Usha Kumari 1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA JAISWAL
ORAL ORDER
4 24-10-2019 Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned
Spl. PP for the State.
This is an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the refusal of prayer of anticipatory bail vide order dated 01.08.2019 passed by learned 1st Addl. District & Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Bettiah, West Champaran, in SC/ST Bagaha P.S. Case No. 4 of 2015 registered under Sections 147, 447, 341, 323, 385, 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3811 of 2019(4) dt.24-10-2019 2/3
Five named accused persons including the appellants arriving at the door of the informant started fencing his land located adjacent to his house. On protest made by the informant, they slated him and co-accused Mani Bhusan Singh and appellant Binod Chaudhary started assaulting him. In the meantime, his wife and daughter-in-law arrived there. They spat on the face of his wife and made his daughter-in-law leave the place assaulting her. They were also slating the informant in the name of his caste and demanded of Rs. 50,000/- as extortion else his land will be taken in the Brhamaasthan.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. As a matter of fact, the land in question is Brhamaasthan and for managing the land and organizing worship there, the appellants and others had given Rs. 91,000/- to brother-in-law of the informant but, the said money was devoured by him. Resultantly, co-accused Braj Kishore Chaudhary has lodged Bhairoganj P.S. Case No. 389 of 2014 against brother-in-law of the informant, and subsequently, the matter was settled before Punches but, despite settlement, the informant has lodged this false and frivolous case against the appellants and others. Allegation levelled against the appellants is not specific rather general and omnibus
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3811 of 2019(4) dt.24-10-2019 3/3
in nature. None has sustained injury in the occurrence. There is inordinate and abnormal delay of 27 days in lodging the FIR without assigning any explanation for the said delay, which creates serious doubt about the prosecution case. Appellants have no criminal antecedent.
Learned Spl. PP for the State opposed the prayer
for bail.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named appellants be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned 1st Addl. District & Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Bettiah, West Champaran, in SC/ST Bagaha P.S. Case No. 4 of 2015, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and appeal is allowed.
(Prakash Chandra Jaiswal, J)
rohit/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to allow the appeal against the refusal of anticipatory bail under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Binod Chaudhary
The State of Bihar
Prakash Chandra Jaiswal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
