Dismissed

Subodh Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC1 Nov 2021CR. APP (SJ)/1474/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court disposed of an appeal challenging the rejection of anticipatory bail against appellants charged under the SC/ST Act and IPC. Upholding the Special Judge's view that anticipatory bail under Section 18 was not maintainable given prima facie cognizance, the court dismissed the appeal but offered a direction for consideration of regular bail if appellants surrender.

What did the court decide?

The appeal against rejection of anticipatory bail is dismissed; however, the appellants are directed to surrender and apply for regular bail within six weeks for consideration by the court below.

Subodh Yadav Vs The State of Bihar — Caste Atrocities | Patna HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1474 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-5 Year-2018 Thana- BHARGAMA District- Araria

¶3

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

¶4

SUBODH YADAV Son of Bahadur Yadav Resident of Village - Raghunathpur South, Police Station - Bhargama, District - Araria.

¶5

Bahadur Yadav Son of Late Shivdhari Yadav Resident of Village - Raghunathpur South, Police Station - Bhargama, District - Araria.

¶6

Nirmala Devi Wife of Bahadur Yadav Resident of Village - Raghunathpur South, Police Station - Bhargama, District - Araria.

... ... Appellant/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Respondent/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Rana For the Respondent/s : Mr. A.G ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 01-11-2021 Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶13

The instant appeal has been filed by the appellants against the order dated 18.12.2020 passed by learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Araria in ABP No. 1850 of 2020 whereby the prayer for bail of the appellants in connection with Special (SC/ST) Case No. 10 of 2018 arising out of Bhargama P.S. Case No. 05 of 2018 under Sections 341, 323, 354B, 379, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3(i)(r) of the SC/ST Act was rejected.

¶14

It is alleged that when the informant demanded their

¶15

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1474 of 2021(2) dt.01-11-2021 2/3

¶16

dues amount, the appellants hurled abuses upon the informant with her caste name. On protest raised by the informant, the appellant no. 1 and 2 tore her clothes and appellant no. 3 snatched her silver chain and Rs. 200 in cash and also tried to strangulate her.

¶17

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that appellants have been falsely implicated in this case due to trivial dispute. They have not taken the cast name of the informant in public view. No offence is made out under the provisions of the SC/ST Act against them. They have got no criminal antecedent.

¶18

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that during investigation, the allegations were found true and Prima facie cognizance has been taken against the appellants. Thus, in view of Section 18 of the Act, an application for grant of pre-arrest bail would not be maintainable , and thereafter vide order dated 18.12.2020, the learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Spl. Judge, Araria has rejected the anticipatory bail of the appellants.

¶19

In view of the above, this Court does not find any infirmity or illegality in the order of learned Court below.

¶20

Accordingly, the appeal with regard to the appellants

¶21

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1474 of 2021(2) dt.01-11-2021 3/3

¶22

for release the appellants on anticipatory bail is rejected.

¶23

However, if the appellant surrenders and prays for regular bail within a period of six weeks, the same shall be considered by the court below, without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

¶24

With the aforesaid observation/direction, the appeal stands disposed off.

¶25

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J)

¶26

sushma/- U T

Subodh Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subodh Yadav 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

Dhananjay Pandey Vs The State of Bihar

Rakesh Yadav @ Rakesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ajit Kumar @ Ajit Roy Vs The State of Bihar

Rukman @ Lukman Vs The State of Bihar

Rakesh Prasad Singh @ Rakesh Singh Vs the State of Bihar

Simlesh Rai @ Simlesh Kumar Ray Vs The State of Bihar