Dismissed

Ramchandra Yadav and Anr. v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC18 Jul 2019CR. APP (SJ)/773/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court rejected the appeal seeking anticipatory bail for appellants accused in a caste-atrocity case under the SC/ST Act and IPC 302. The court held that prima facie evidence of assault and death justified bail rejection, directing surrender to seek regular bail.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for anticipatory bail rejected; appellants directed to surrender within six weeks to seek regular bail.

Ramchandra Yadav and Anr. Vs The State of Bihar — Caste Atrocities | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.773 of 2019

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-34 Year-2018 Thana- SC/ST District- Jehanabad

¶3

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

¶4

1. Ramchandra Yadav, Son of Late Janki Yadav R/o Village- Bishunpur, P.SMakhdumpur, District- Jehanabad

¶5

Pintu Yadav @ Mintu Kumar Son of Sri Ramchandra Yadav R/o VillageBishunpur, P.S- Makhdumpur, District- Jehanabad

... ... Appellants.

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Shashank Shekhar For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA JAISWAL

¶10

ORAL ORDER

¶11

5 18-07-2019 Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned counsel for the informant and learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶12

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 01.02.2019 passed by learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge, Jehanabad in connection with Jehanabad SC/ST P.S. Case No. 34 of 2018 registered under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1) (r) (s), 3 (2) (v) (va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

¶13

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.773 of 2019(5) dt.18-07-2019 2/3

¶14

Atrocities) Act.

¶15

For not according toddy co-accused Ramashray Yadav @ Rinku Yadav assaulted on the head of father of the informant by means of rod and the appellants also slated him in the name of his caste and assaulted him by means of lathi, rod and valetha. His father succumed to his injuries.

¶16

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 ulterior motive. F.I.R. has been lodged after two days of the occurrence which creates serious doubt. They have no concern with the aforesaid occurrence. Initially the informant took the dead body of the deceased at the police station and created chaos but it did not disclose the name of the appellants in the occurrence to the police. The allegation levelled against the appellants are not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. After investigation of the case the I.O. has submitted final form against the appellants. Appellants have no criminal antecedent.

¶17

Learned Spl. PP for the State and learned counsel for the informant opposing the prayer for bail submitted that the appellants assaulted the father of informant by means of lathi, rod and valetha and also slated him in the name of his caste. The

¶18

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.773 of 2019(5) dt.18-07-2019 3/3

¶19

doctor conducting autopsy of the cadaver of the deceased has found several injuries including two injuries on the head of the deceased. Though the final form in the case has been submitted by the I.O. but finding prima facie case against the appellants the learned lower Court has taken cognizance against the appellants. Hence the appellants do not deserve bail.

¶20

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.

¶21

Accordingly, this appeal is disposed of.

¶22

(Prakash Chandra Jaiswal, J)

¶23

Trivedi/-

¶24

U T

Ramchandra Yadav and Anr. v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramchandra Yadav and Anr. 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

Sudhir Kumar and Anr. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Shambhu Chaudhari and Ors. Vs The State of Bihar

Branch Manager, Vs Ranjeet KUmar

Shambhu Bind and Ors. Vs The State of Bihar and Anr.

Nitesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Munni Devi Vs the State of Bihar