In an appeal challenging the rejection of an anticipatory bail petition, the High Court set aside the lower court order holding that the SC/ST Act was not attracted. The court granted bail conditioned on furnishing a bond within eight weeks.
Directed release on bail by executing a bond of Rs. 10,000 within eight days of receipt of the order.
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.2568 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-28 Year-2020 Thana- KARAKAT District- Rohtas
======================================================
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr.Surendra Kumar Mishra For the Respondent/s : Mr.A.G. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL ORDER
the appellants and Mr. Rajani Kant Pandey, learned counsel for the informant. The State is represented by
Mr. Binay Krishna, learned Special Public Prosecutor.
The appellants have challenged the order dated
06.02.2021, passed by the learned 1st Additional District
and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge, Rohtas at Sasaram, in A.B.P. No. 26 of 2020, arising out of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2568 of 2021(2) dt.20-07-2021 2/4
Karakat P. S. Case No. 28 of 2020, whereby the prayer made on behalf of the appellants for grant of anticipatory bail for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 307, 354 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 (1) (r) (s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, has been rejected.
The appellants are family members and have been made accused in this case on the allegation of the informant that while he was constructing his house over a plot of land, he was forbidden from doing so and was demeaned by taking his caste name.
The informant and others were assaulted also.
The learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that there is a dispute between the parties with respect to the land in question for which civil litigation is pending before a competent Court of Law.
Apart from this, it has been submitted that most of the injuries suffered by the informant and others
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2568 of 2021(2) dt.20-07-2021 3/4
are simple in nature and caused by hard and blunt substance.
A Title Suit No. 34 of 2021, as noted above, is
pending between the parties. Most of the witnesses of the locality have not stated about the nature of occurrence as has been reported in the F.I.R.
There is a counter version of the occurrence
also.
As opposed to the afore-stated contentions, Mr.
Pandey, learned counsel for the informant has submitted that though most of the injuries on the persons of the victims are stated to be simple but the nature of one of the injuries is still to be assessed.
However, regard being had to the factual background of the case and the circumstances in which
the occurrence took place, the provisions of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 does not appear to have been attracted.
For the afore-stated reasons, the order dated
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2568 of 2021(2) dt.20-07-2021 4/4
06.02.2021, passed by the learned 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge, Rohtas at Sasaram, is set aside.
The appeal stands allowed.
The appellants, above-named, are directed to
be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt / production of a copy of this order, on their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000 /- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge cum Special Judge, Rohtas at Sasaram, in connection with Karakat P. S. Case No. 28 of 2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.
(Ashutosh Kumar, J)
skm/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellants are entitled to the grant of bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Whether the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 applies to the present case.
9 provisions across 3 enactments
LAL BABU SINGH
RAJESH SINGH
PRAMOD KUMAR SINGH
VINOD SINGH
MANOJ SINGH
THE STATE OF BIHAR
ASHUTOSH KUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
