Allowed

MD Saiful @ Shamim v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC18 Oct 2022CR. APP (SJ)/1691/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed an appeal under the SC/ST Act regarding the refusal of bail. The court set aside the previous order and granted bail to all appellants subject to conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC, despite a delay in filing the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to all appellants on furnishing a bond of Rs.25,000 each with two sureties of the like amount, conditioned on appearing within six weeks.

MD Saiful @ Shamim Vs The State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1691 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-46 Year-2020 Thana- SC/ST District- Purnia

¶3

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

¶4

MD SAIFUL @ SHAMIM Son of sk habib Resident of Village- Gandwa, P.S.- Dagarua, District- Purnia.

¶5

Shubham Son of sk habib Resident of Village- Gandwa, P.S.- Dagarua, District- Purnia.

¶6

MD Shahabuddin Son of sk Habib Resident of Village- Gandwa, P.S.Dagarua, District- Purnia.

¶7

MD Shajhan Son of Shubham Resident of Village- Gandwa, P.S.- Dagarua, District- Purnia.

¶8

Shaikh Abbas Son of Late Musahib Ali Resident of Village- Gandwa, P.S.Dagarua, District- Purnia.

¶9

MD Raju Son of Abbas Resident of Village- Gandwa, P.S.- Dagarua, District- Purnia. ... ... Appellant/s

¶10

Versus

¶11

The State of Bihar

¶12

Sangeeta Devi Wife of dileep Roy Resident of Village-Gaudwas,P.SDagaruwa,District-Purnia

¶13

... ... Respondent/s

¶14

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

¶15

Appearance :

¶16

For the Appellant/s : Mr.Vikram Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan

¶17

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

¶18

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN

¶19

ORAL ORDER

¶20

4 18-10-2022 Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned

¶21

Special Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶22

Though, Vakalatnama has already been filed by the

¶23

respondent no. 2 but no one has appeared on her behalf.

¶24

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 24.09.2020, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, (SC/ST Act), Purnia in connection with SC/ST P.S. Case No. 46 of

¶25

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1691 of 2021(4) dt.18-10-2022 2/3

¶26

2020, registered under Sections 341, 447, 448, 379, 354(B), 504, 506 of the IPC and Sections 3(I) (I) (S), 3 (w) (I) 3(2) Va of SC/ST Act.

¶27

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that the appellants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that there is general and omnibus allegation levelled against the appellants. He submits that the alleged occurrence is said to be of 27.06.2020 but the FIR in conspiracy has been filed after 12 days of occurrence without any explanation of delay. He submits that there is no specific overt act against the appellants to abuse the informant by taking caste name as such, no case under SC/ST Act is made out against them. He further submits that appellants have no criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of this appeal.

¶28

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that there is delay in filing the present appeal, let the above named appellants in the event of their 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) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, (SC/ST

¶29

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1691 of 2021(4) dt.18-10-2022 3/3

¶30

Act), Purnia in connection with SC/ST P.S. Case No. 46 of 2020, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438

¶31

(2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶32

Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed.

¶33

devendra/- U T

¶34

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J)

MD Saiful @ Shamim v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

MD Saiful @ Shamim 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

Rishikesh Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Shamim Ahmad @ Samim Ahmad Vs The State of Bihar

Jahangir Ansari Vs the State of Bihar

Pawan Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Pradeep Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Umesh Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar