The High Court allowed an appeal against the refusal of bail under the SC/ST Act, granting bail to the appellant on payment of bond and sureties, noting that the disputed amount was already paid.
Bail granted upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties of like amount, to be executed within six 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.1093 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-50 Year-2013 Thana- SC/ST BETTIAH District- West
Champaran
======================================================
Anil Kumar Pandey Son Of Late Yogendra Pandey Resident Of Village - Dumra Bagda, P.S.- Kotwa, Motihari, Dist.- East Champaran.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr.Bimlesh Kumar Pandey For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER
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 17.09.2020, passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge 1st cum Special Judge (SC/ST), Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with SC/ST P.S. Case No. 50 of 2013, registered under Sections 341, 323, 406, 420, 504, 506/34 of the IPC and Sections 3(i) (x) of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1093 of 2021(3) dt.15-02-2023 2/3
SC/ST 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 for the same occurrence and the similar story, the informant had filed complaint case no. 836(c) of 2013 in which the informant compromised the matter and has already received the entire amount as claimed by him. He submits that there is no specific overt act against the appellant to abuse the informant by taking caste name. 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 and the fact that the appellant has already paid the entire disputed amount to the informant/complainant, 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 Additional District and Sessions Judge 1st cum Special Judge (SC/ST), Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with SC/ST P.S. Case No. 50 of 2013, subject to the condition as laid down
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1093 of 2021(3) dt.15-02-2023 3/3
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
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appellant should be enlarged on bail given that the disputed amount has been paid to the complainant.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Anil Kumar Pandey
The State of Bihar
Yogendra Ram
Anjani Kumar Sharan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
