Allowed

Sudhir Kumar Deo @ Deo Jee v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC23 Oct 2019CR. APP (SJ)/4071/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the appeal against the refusal of anticipatory bail under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The Court set aside the impugned order and released the appellant on bail with conditions, noting the lack of collusion due to timing and the co-ordinate Bench's earlier decision.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order refusing anticipatory bail is set aside. The appellant is released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties.

Sudhir Kumar Deo @ Deo Jee Vs The State of Bihar — Caste Atrocities | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4071 of 2019

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-155 Year-2010 Thana- WARISNAGAR District- Samastipur

¶3

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

¶4

Sudhir Kumar Deo @ Deo Jee Son of Late Ramdeo Prasad Deo Resident of Mohalla - Bahadurpur, P.O. and P.S.- Samastipur, District - Samastipur.

... ... Appellant/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Vijay Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna ======================================================

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA JAISWAL

¶10

ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 23-10-2019

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Spl. PP for the State.

¶13

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 26.08.2019 passed by learned 1^st Addl. Sessions Judge, Samastipur in Waris Nagar P.S. Case No. 155 of 2010 registered under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(X) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

¶14

Co-accused Awadhesh Prasad and Arjun Ram are said to have withdrawn Rs. 85,500/- from the account of son of the informant in collusion of the appellant, who happens to be

¶15

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4071 of 2019(3) dt.23-10-2019 2/3

¶16

Branch Manager of the Bank. When the informant approached the appellant to make complain, he made him to leave his office slating him in the name of his caste.

¶17

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant has no concern with the aforesaid occurrence. He has been falsely implicated in this case merely because he was Branch Manager of Branch, Dhurlakh at the time of filing complaint petition. Earlier, he was posted in Circle Office, Patna and he was transferred to the said Branch, Dhurlakh on 14.05.2010 and was relieved from the Circle Office, Patna on 29.05.2010 i.e. much later to the date of occurrence. As he was not posted in the said Branch on 7.05.2010 or on the earlier occasion, there was no question of collusion of the appellant in withdrawal of cheque by the accused persons and slating the informant in the name of his caste at the hand of the appellant. There is inordinate and abnormal delay of three months in filing the complaint petition without assigning any plausible and convincing explanation for the said delay. Appellant has no criminal antecedent. Similarly situated co-accused, namely, Awadhesh Prasad and Arjun Ram have been enlarged on anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 7.11.2017 passed in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.

¶18

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4071 of 2019(3) dt.23-10-2019 3/3

¶19

2752 of 2017.

¶20

Learned Spl. PP for the State opposed the prayer

¶21

for bail.

¶22

In the facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named appellant be released on bail, in the event of his 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) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned 1^st Addl. Sessions Judge cum Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Samastipur in Waris Nagar P.S. Case No. 155 of 2010, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶23

Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and appeal is allowed.

¶24

(Prakash Chandra Jaiswal, J)

¶25

rohit/-

¶26

U T

Sudhir Kumar Deo @ Deo Jee v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudhir Kumar Deo @ Deo Jee 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raj Kishore Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Shyama Kushwaha Vs The State of Bihar

Badri Prasad Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Pankaj Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Rajnish Kumar @ Rajnish Sharma Vs The State of Bihar

Ramdeo Yadav Vs The State of Bihar