The High Court allowed the bail appeal and set aside the order rejecting bail for the appellants facing charges under various sections of the IPC and the SC/ST Act, ordering their enlargement on bail.
Impugned order set aside; appellants enlarged on bail with Rs. 10,000 bond and two sureties within four weeks.
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.250 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-232 Year-2021 Thana- KESARIA District- East Champaran
======================================================
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Nafisuzzoha For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Spl.P.P. For the Informant Mr. Dhananjay Kr. Gupta
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER
Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned counsel for the informant and learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.
The instant appeal has been filed by the appellants against the order dated 26.11.2021 passed by learned 1st ADJcum-Spl. Judge, SC/ST Act, Motihari, East Champaran in ABP No. 3399 of 2021 whereby the prayer for bail of the appellants in connection with Kesariya P.S. Case no. 232 of 2021 under Sections 341, 342, 323, 307, 354(B), 379 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3(i)(v)(s) of SC/ST Act was rejected.
Allegations against the appellants are of abusing by taking the caste name of the informant and assaulting her family
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.250 of 2022(4) dt.15-09-2022 2/3
members. It is further alleged that they also tried to outrage her modesty.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that appellants have been falsely implicated in this case due to old enmity. Specific allegation of firing is against Nannu Rai, which hit none. All injuries received by the injured persons are said to be simple in nature, as per injury report. They have got no criminal antecedent. No offence is made out under the provisions of the SC/ST Act against them. The appellants have not taken the caste name of the informant in public view and they had no intention to disgrace his image.
The appeal for bail is opposed by learned Spl. P.P. for
the State.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that there is general and omnibus allegation against the appellants , the Court is inclined to allow this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 26.11.2021 passed in A.B.P. No 3399 of 2021 is hereby set aside.
The appellants are directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Kesariya P.S. Case No. 232 of 2021 in the event of arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.250 of 2022(4) dt.15-09-2022 3/3
four weeks on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned 1st ADJ-cum Spl. Judge, SC/ST, Motihari, East Champaran.
(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J)
sushma/-
U
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the bail application dismissed by the Sessions Court against the appellants should be allowed.
Whether the allegations cast under the SC/ST Act were sufficient to afford bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Lakhindra Rai @ Lakhindra Kumar Priyadashi
Bhola Rai @ Jitendra Prasad Yadav
The State of Bihar
Shanti Devi
Sunil Kumar Panwar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
