This appeal against the order of a Special Judge rejecting pre-arrest anticipatory bail in a caste-atrocity case has been dismissed. The High Court held it was not inclined to grant bail.
The prayer for pre-arrest anticipatory bail stands rejected and the appeal is dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2215 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-28 Year-2020 Thana- SC/ST BETTIAH District- West
Champaran
======================================================
... ... Appellants
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Respondent ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr.Saroj Kumar Sharma, Advocate For the State : Mr.Binay Krishna, Special PP. For the Informant : Mr. Akhileshwar Kumar Shrivastava, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER
2 02-11-2021
Let the defects, as pointed out by the office, be removed within four weeks of start of normal functioning of the physical court.
Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for the informant, who suo motu appeared in the present proceeding.
This appeal under Section 14 A(2) of the Scheduled
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2215 of 2021(2) dt.02-11-2021 2/3
Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been directed against the order dated 02.02.2021 passed by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge cum Special Judge, SC/ST, Bettiah, West Champaran in A.B.P. No. 225 of 2021 in connection with Bettiah SC/ST P.S. Case No. 28 of 2020 registered under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 354(b), 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(i)(r)(s)(ii)(v-a) of SC/ST (POA) Act, whereby the prayer for pre-arrest bail of the appellants has been rejected.
According to prosecution case, on 18.08.2020 at 8:00 A.M. while the informant’s daughter after purchasing the medicine reached the door, appellant no. 1 Sandeep Kumar Sah along with co-accused Raju Prasad started teasing her calling her caste name. On protest made by the informant, the appellants along with other accused abused the informant calling her caste name and dragged her on the earth and also assaulted her. The informant further alleges that the accused persons assaulted the informant and her daughter and snatched Mangal Sutra from the neck of the informant.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that they have falsely been implicated in the present case because the informant after encroaching the public road constructed her
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2215 of 2021(2) dt.02-11-2021 3/3
house on the public road. Learned counsel further submits that the informant, namely, Indu Devi has given threatening to the appellants to implicate falsely in the case.
Learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the appellants and informed this court that charge sheet has already been filed on 12.01.2021 and cognizance has been taken on 27.01.2021 against all the appellants.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions of the parties, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the appellants and, accordingly, the same stands rejected.
In the aforesaid manner, this appeal stands dismissed.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
shahzad/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appeal for pre-arrest anticipatory bail under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989 should be allowed.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Champaran
The State of Bihar
Rajesh Kumar Verma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
