Allowed

Amit Kumar @ Babu Bhai v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC7 Jul 2021CR. APP (SJ)/1249/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal appeal, the High Court set aside the single judge's order rejecting anticipatory bail. Finding that specific offences were not made out due to general allegations of a fight and grudge, the court allowed the appeal, quashed the rejection, and granted bail conditions subject to arrest within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order rejecting anticipatory bail is set aside. The appellant is directed to be released on bail upon arrest or surrender within eight weeks, furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000 with two

Amit Kumar @ Babu Bhai Vs The State of Bihar — Caste Atrocities | Patna HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1249 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-254 Year-2020 Thana- GAYA MUFASIL District- Gaya

¶3

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

¶4

Amit Kumar @ Babu Bhai Son of Late Virendra Singh Resident of villageBlock No . 3 Lodipur, P.S- Mufassil, Dist- Gaya

¶5

... ... Appellant/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar Bihar

¶8

... ... Respondent/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Vasant Vikas- Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna- S.P.P. ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 07-07-2021

¶12

Heard Mr. Vasant Vikas, the learned Advocate for

¶13

the appellant and Binay Krishna, the learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶14

The appellant has challenged the order dated 12.11.2020 passed by the learned Exclusive Special Judge, S.C./ S.T., Gaya in connection with Mufassil P. S. Case No.254 of 2020, instituted for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 3(2)(v)(a)/3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, whereby their prayer for grant of anticipatory bail has been rejected.

¶15

From the perusal of the F.I.R., it appears that two groups were fighting amongst themselves and the informant

¶16

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1249 of 2021(2) dt.07-07-2021 2/3

¶17

and his associates were caught in the cross fire and were injured by gunshot.

¶18

For the same occurrence, the agent of the appellant has also filed a case alleging that the appellant is the proprietor of an engineering company who was always subjected to extraction of illegal protection money from one Jitendra Sao @ Jitu Sao and his associates.

¶19

Nothing specific has been alleged in the subject F.I.R.

¶20

Assuming every allegations in the F.I.R. to be true, so far as the appellant is concerned, none of the offences under the I.P.C. or under the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act can at all be said to have been made out. There is general allegation of fight between the two groups with respect to the marking of the boundary and delimitation.

¶21

It appears that only to feed fat the grudge of the appellant for not succumbing to demands of aforesaid Jitendra Sao that this case has been filed. It has therefore been urged on behalf of the appellant that in the event of none of the offences under the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act having been

¶22

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1249 of 2021(2) dt.07-07-2021 3/3

¶23

made out, the appellant deserves to be granted anticipatory bail.

¶24

For the reasons afore-noted, the order dated

¶25

12.11.2020, referred to above, is set aside.

¶26

The appeal stands allowed.

¶27

The appellant, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of eight weeks, is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST, Gaya in connection with Mufassil P. S. Case No.254 of 2020, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶28

(Ashutosh Kumar, J)

¶29

vikash/-

¶30

U T

Amit Kumar @ Babu Bhai v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Kumar @ Babu Bhai 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

Sub Laxmi Prasad @ Subh Laxmi Prasad Vs the Central Bureau of Investigation (C. B. I.), New Delhi

Sub Laxmi Prasad @ Subh Laxmi Prasad @ Shubh Lakshmi Prasad Vs the Central Bureau of Investigation (C.B.I.), New Delhi

Ganga Ram Shimbani @ Ajay Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Raja Ram Mishra Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Harun Vs The State of Bihar

Dilip Rai Vs The State of Bihar