Allowed

Pradeep Kumar Singh @ Pradeep Kumar @ Bhikhari Singh v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC23 Jun 2022CR. APP (SJ)/457/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court allowed criminal appeals against orders refusing bail to appellants charged in a case involving an attack on a polling booth. The court set aside the impugned order and granted bail subject to conditions including appearance bonds and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order setting aside released appellants on bail bonds of Rs. 20,000 each with two sureties of like amount subject to conditions of presence and cancellation on default.

Pradeep Kumar Singh @ Pradeep Kumar @ Bhikhari Singh Vs The… — Caste Atrocities | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.441 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-287 Year-2021 Thana- KALYANPUR District- East Champaran

¶3

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

¶4

Raju Das, Son of Ram Babu Das, Resident of Village- Harpur, Hardas, Police Station- Kalyanpur, District- East Champaran

¶5

... ... Appellant/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Faiz Ahmad Faiz Son Of Md. Manjural Haque Resident Of VillageBahlolpur, P.S.- Dhaka, District- East Champaran

¶9

... ... Respondent/s

¶10

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

¶11

with

¶12

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 457 of 2022

¶13

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-287 Year-2021 Thana- KALYANPUR District- East Champaran

¶14

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

¶15

Pradeep Kumar Singh @ Pradeep Kumar @ Bhikhari Singh, Son of Kanhai Singh, Resident of Village - Pipra Khem , P.S.- Kalyanpur, Distt.- East Champaran.

¶16

Firoj Alam, Son of Gaffar Ansari, Resident of Village - Math Jagdishpur, P.S.- Kalyanpur, Distt.- East Champaran.

¶17

... ... Appellant/s

¶18

Versus

¶19

The State of Bihar

¶20

Faiz Ahmad Faiz Son of Md. Manjural Haque Resident of Village - Bahlolpur, P.s.- Dhaka, Distt.- East Champaran.

¶21

... ... Respondent/s

¶22

====================================================== Appearance : (In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 441 of 2022) For the Appellant/s : Mr.Shashi Bhushan Pandey, Advocate For the State : Mr.Sadanand Paswan, Spl.P.P. (In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 457 of 2022) For the Appellant/s : Mr.Madhurendra Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr.Usha Kumari 1, Spl.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 23-06-2022

¶23

Since both the aforesaid appeals arise from Kalyanpur P.S. Case No.287 of 2021, as such, they have been

¶24

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.441 of 2022 dt.23-06-2022 2/4

¶25

heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

¶26

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that the instant case has been filed by the Presiding Officer, represented by the State.

¶27

Considering the same, no notice is required to be issued upon the informant.

¶28

Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the State.

¶29

Let the defect (s), as pointed out by the office, be removed within a period of four weeks from the date of resumption of physical filing and physical removal of defect.

¶30

This is an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the refusal of prayer for bail by order dated 05.01.2022 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, East Champaran, Motihari in connection with Kalyanpur P.S. Case No. 287 of 2021, registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 325, 353, 354, 504, 506, 509, 307, 427, 379, 188, 440, 332, 171 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 27 of the Arms Act, Section 3 of D.P. Act, 131, 134B, 135, 135A of R.P. Act and

¶31

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.441 of 2022 dt.23-06-2022 3/4

¶32

Sections 3 (i) (r) (s) of SC/ST Act.

¶33

Allegedly, the appellants and several other accused persons attacked on the polling booth and assaulted the police personnel brutally. They damaged the EVM and started firing.

¶34

Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that no such occurrence in the manner as alleged ever took place. The appellants have falsely been implicated in the case due to highhandedness of he police. The allegation levelled against the appellants is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. There is no allegation against the appellants to abuse the informant by taking caste name, as such, no offence under SC/ST Act is made out against them. The appellants are in custody since 04.11.2021. The main assailant, namely, Priyanka Sinha has already been enlarged on anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.03.2022 passed in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.218 of 2022. The several coaccused persons, having similar allegations, have also been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide Cr. Appeal (SJ) Nos.267 of 2022, 268 of 2022 and 301 of 2022.

¶35

Learned Special PP has opposed the prayer for bail. Having regard to the submissions made here-in-above and considering the fact that the main assailant has been granted

¶36

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.441 of 2022 dt.23-06-2022 4/4

¶37

bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court, let the appellants, above named, be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 20,000/- (Twenty thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, East Champaran, Motihari in connection with Kalyanpur P.S. Case No. 287 of 2021, subject to the following conditions:

¶38

(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the appellants.

¶39

(ii) The appellants will remain present on each and every date fixed by the court below.

¶40

(iii) In case of absence for three consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the appellants will be liable to

¶41

be cancelled by the court concerned.

¶42

Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the

¶43

appeal is allowed.

¶44

(Arun Kumar Jha, J)

¶45

V.K.Pandey/-

¶46

AFR/NAFR	N.A.F.R.
CAV DATE	N.A.
Uploading Date	24.06.2022
Transmission Date	24.06.2022

Pradeep Kumar Singh @ Pradeep Kumar @ Bhikhari Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pradeep Kumar Singh @ Pradeep Kumar @ Bhikhari 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

Dilip Rai Vs the State of Bihar

Krishna Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Ratnesh Kumar @ Ratnesh Kumar Kushwaha Vs the State of Bihar

Bhoti Kumar @ Prince Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Bechu Kumar @ Bechu @ Krishna Patel Vs The State of Bihar

Rajiv Kumar Vs The State of Bihar