The High Court allowed an appeal against the refusal of anticipatory bail. The court set aside the impugned order and enlarged the appellants on bail, relying on the lack of specific allegations and property disputes between parties.
Impugned order set aside; appellants enlarged on bail by furnishing bond of Rs. 10,000 each 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.4063 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-54 Year-2018 Thana- MADHUBANI COMPLAINT CASE District- Madhubani
======================================================
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr.Anju Jha For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sadanand Paswan For the Complainant : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Jha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA JAISWAL ORAL ORDER
Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned counsel for the informant and learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.
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
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4063 of 2019(3) dt.24-10-2019 2/3
vide order dated 05.08.2019 passed by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Madhubani in connection with C.R. No.54 of 2018 registered under Sections 323, 341, 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(i) (x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
In course of proceeding towards village Loha, when complainant arrived near the house of appellant Vakil Jha, he accosted and slated her and called other accused persons and on the exhortation of appellant Vakil Jha, all other accused persons slating her in the name of her caste assaulted her by means of slap and fist. Appellant Pradeep Kumar Jha tore her blouse and pulled her saree while appellant Prakash Jha snatched her silver hasuli. When her husband rushed in her rescue they also assaulted him slating him in the name of his caste and obtained his signature on the blank paper.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. As a matter of fact appellant Vakil Jha has filed informatory petition against Tarakant Jha and his son preceding to the case under hand. Said Tarakant Jha due to land dispute got this case lodged to settle his personal score. Said Tarakant Jha is also witness in the complaint petition. There is property dispute
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4063 of 2019(3) dt.24-10-2019 3/3
between the appellants and said Tarakant Jha. The allegation levelled against the appellants is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. None has sustained injury in the occurrence.
Learned Spl. PP for the State and learned counsel for the complainant opposing the prayer for bail submitted that the appellants assaulted the complainant and her husband and also slated her in the name of her caste and disrobed her. Hence, they do not deserve bail.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, the above named appellants, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned 1st Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Madhubani in connection with C.R. No.54 of 2018, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and this appeal is allowed.
(Prakash Chandra Jaiswal, J)
amit/- U T
3 issues framed by the court
Whether to allow the appeal by setting aside the order refusing anticipatory bail.
Whether the appellants were entitled to bail in a case involving caste-based assault and property dispute.
Whether the allegations were specific or general in nature.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Vakil Jha and others
The State of Bihar
Prakash Chandra Jaiswal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
