Appeal against refusal of bail in a case arising under the SC/ST Act and IPC. The High Court granted bail to the appellant, subject to conditions, setting aside the order refusing bail.
Appellant released on bail via bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties of similar amount, subject to Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. conditions.
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.1617 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-29 Year-2021 Thana- BAHADURPUR District- Darbhanga
====================================================== Rinku Singh Wife Of Sunil Kumar Singh R/V- Ojhaul, P.S.- Bahadurpur, Dist- Darbhanga
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Kedar Jha For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER
3 14-12-2022
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.
From perusal of the office notes, it appears that notice has been validly served upon the respondent no. 2 but nobody appears on his behalf.
This is an appeal under section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, (hereinafter in short referred to as the ‘SC/ST Act’) against the refusal of prayer for bail vide order dated 25.03.2022, passed by learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Darbhanga in connection with Bahadurpur P.S. Case No. 29 of 2021, registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 504, 506, 436 of the IPC, Sections 3(2) (iv) of SC/ST Act and
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1617 of 2022(3) dt.14-12-2022 2/2
Section 27 of the Arms Act.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that there is no specific overt act against the appellant to abuse the informant by taking caste name. He submits that there is compromise in between the parties. He further submits that appellant has no criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of this appeal.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named appellant in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Darbhanga in connection with Bahadurpur P.S. Case No. 29 of 2021, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed.
(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J)
devendra/- U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellant be enlarged on bail in connection with the cases registered under the SC/ST Act and other offences.
Whether a compromise between the parties neutralizes the allegation of false implication.
5 provisions across 4 enactments
Rinku Singh
The State of Bihar
Kanhai Paswan
Anjani Kumar Sharan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
