Allowed

Umesh Mehta v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC5 Jun 2020CR. APP (SJ)/241/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court allowed this criminal appeal under the SC/ST Act against the rejection of bail. Observing that the FIR alleged indiscriminate firing from both sides by witnesses and only one injury was found, the court found merit in the bail prayer.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order refusing bail set aside; appellant directed to be released on bail on furnishing bond and bail bond amount of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties.

Umesh Mehta Vs The State of Bihar — Caste Atrocities | Patna HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.241 of 2020

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-251 Year-2018 Thana- BARHARA KOTHI District- Purnia

¶3

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

¶4

Umesh Mehta S/o Ganeshi Mehta Resident of Rajganj, P.S.- Bihariganj, District- Madhepura

¶5

... ... Appellant/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Dr. Bidhu Ranjan For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ramchandra Sahni, Spl. P.P. ======================================================

¶8

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

¶9

ORAL ORDER

¶10

4 05-06-2020

¶11

Heard Dr. Bidhu Ranjan, learned counsel appearing

¶12

for the appellant as well as Mr. Ramchandra Sahni, learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State through video conferencing.

¶13

This criminal appeal has been preferred under Section 14A(2) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the order dated 18.12.2019 passed by the learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge – cum – Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Purnea in S.C. & S.T. Case No. 118/2019 (arising out of Barhara P.S. Case No. 251 of 2018) by which and whereunder the learned Special Judge refused to enlarge the appellant on bail.

¶14

The appellant is named in the first information report with allegation that he along with others made indiscriminate firing on account of land dispute, as a result whereof one Rudha

¶15

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.241 of 2020(4) dt.05-06-2020 2/3

¶16

Devi sustained firearm injury and, subsequently, she died in course of her treatment.

¶17

The case diary is available. The perusal of case diary goes to show that only one firearm injury was found on the person of the deceased. Furthermore, paragraph 58 of the case diary goes to show that the statement of one Kaso Devi, who happens to be the maternal grandmother of deceased, was recorded and she claimed that firing from two sides were going on and in that firing Rudha Devi sustained injury. Furthermore, this witness very, specifically, stated that there was land dispute between accused persons including appellant as well as prosecution party including informant and on account of taking possession of the land, both parties made firing on each other.

¶18

Learned counsel of the appellant submits that, no doubt, the appellant is named in the first information report but no specific overt act has been attributed against him and only general allegation of firing has been levelled against him.

¶19

Although, learned Spl. P.P. opposed the prayer but taking note of the fact that only one firearm injury has been found on the person of the deceased and one eye witness claimed that firing was not only made from the side of the appellant but also from the prosecution party, in my view this

¶20

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.241 of 2020(4) dt.05-06-2020 3/3

¶21

appeal does have merit.

¶22

Accordingly, this criminal appeal is allowed and, the impugned order dated 18.12.2019 passed by the learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge – cum – Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Purnea, in S.C. & S.T. Case No. 118/2019 (arising out of Barhara P.S. Case No. 251 of 2018) is, hereby, set aside.

¶23

The above named appellant is directed to be released on bail 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 Additional Sessions Judge – cum – Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Purnea, in connection with S.C. & S.T. Case No. 118/2019 (arising out of Barhara P.S. Case No. 251 of 2018).

¶24

(Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J)

¶25

Spd/-

¶26

U T

Umesh Mehta v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Umesh Mehta 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jagdish Sharma Vs The State of Bihar

Munna Mishra Vs The State of Bihar

Brajesh Patel Vs The State of Bihar

Mukul Chaudhary @ Amit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Dabal Chaudhary @ Sujit Chaudhary @ Sujeet Choudhary Vs The State of Bihar

Bikash Mahton Vs The State of Bihar