Allowed

Sudhanshu Kumar @ Sudhanshu Pratap Singh @ Sudhanshu Kumar Singh v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC4 Sept 2021CR. APP (SJ)/2617/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the criminal appeal and set aside the order refusing anticipatory bail. The court directed the release of the appellant on personal bond upon arrest or surrender, with a prospectus for furnishing financial bonds after normalcy is restored.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted. To be released on personal bond and to furnish Rs.10,000/- bonds with sureties after restoration of normalcy.

Sudhanshu Kumar @ Sudhanshu Pratap Singh @ Sudhanshu Kumar… — Caste Atrocities | Patna HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2617 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-333 Year-2020 Thana- CHAPRA TOWN District- Saran

¶3

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

¶4

SUDHANSHU KUMAR @ SUDHANSHU PRATAP SINGH @ SUDHANSHU KUMAR SINGH Son of Munna Singh @ Ranjeet Kumar Singh Resident of Village - Purvi Dahiyawan, Behind Mission Compound Church, P.S.- Chapra Town, Distt.- Saran.

... ... Appellant/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr.Ankur Prakash Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl. P.P. ======================================================

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶10

2 04-09-2021

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Spl. P.P. for the State through virtual mode.

¶12

Counsel for the appellant is directed to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, within a period of four weeks from the date of restoration of normalcy.

¶13

The matter relates to grant of anticipatory bail to the appellant in connection with a case registered for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 504, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(i)(r) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

¶14

The prosecution case, in short, is that the on 12.06.2020, the niece of the informant had gone with her dog for walk, then the appellant assaulted the niece of the informant

¶15

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2617 of 2021(2) dt.04-09-2021 2/3

¶16

and when the informant went at the door of the appellant for complaint, then the appellant called his friends and they also assaulted the informant and abused him by taking his caste name.

¶17

It has been submitted on behalf of the appellant that the appellant has got no criminal antecedent and there is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the appellant. The appellant has falsely been implicated in the present case. No weapon is used in course of occurrence. It is a case and counter case between the parties. Annexure 2 is the counter case. The alleged occurrence has not taken place within public view. Hence no offence under the SC/ST Act is attracted in the present case.

¶18

On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the appellant is named in the F.I.R.

¶19

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the order dated 17.12.2020, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge 1st-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Saran at Chapra vide A.B.P. No.2183 of 2020 in connection with Chapra Town P.S. case No.333 of 2020, is set aside. The criminal appeal is allowed.

¶20

Let the appellant, above named, in the event of arrest

¶21

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2617 of 2021(2) dt.04-09-2021 3/3

¶22

or surrender before the learned court below within a period of twelve weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on his personal bond to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge 1st-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Saran at Chapra in connection with Chapra Town P.S. case No.333 of 2020.

¶23

Once the normalcy is restored, the appellant shall furnish bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each within a period of eight weeks to the satisfaction of the court concerned in connection with the aforesaid case.

¶24

(Sudhir Singh, J)

¶25

Narendra/-

¶26

U T

Sudhanshu Kumar @ Sudhanshu Pratap Singh @ Sudhanshu Kumar Singh v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudhanshu Kumar @ Sudhanshu Pratap Singh @ Sudhanshu Kumar Singh 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

Jalindra Ray Vs The State of Bihar

Tanushka Kumari Vs The State of Bihar

Gorelal Yadav @ Gorelal Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Santosh Prasad @ Santosh Kumar Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

Brajesh Dubey @ Brajesh Kumar Dubey Vs the State of Bihar

Bijay Shankar Mishra Vs The State of Bihar