Single judge allowed criminal appeal against bail rejection. Court set aside previous order and directed enlargement of appellants on bail in a case involving IPC and SC/ST Act charges.
Impugned bail rejection order set aside; appellants directed to be enlarged on bail prospectively depending on surety production.
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.460 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-912 Year-2022 Thana- SIKARPUR District- West Champaran
======================================================
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Anand Kishore Choudhary For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER
4 06-07-2023
has turned to assist the Court.
Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.
The instant appeal has been filed by the appellants against the order dated 6.12.2022 passed by learned 1st Additional District & Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge(SC/ST) Bettiah, West Champaran in BP No. 5738 of 2022 whereby the prayer for bail of the appellants in connection with Shikarpur P.S. Case no. 912 of 2022 under Sections 341, 323, 307, 354(B), 379, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.460 of 2023(4) dt.06-07-2023 2/3
sections 3(i)(r)(s) of SC/ST Act was rejected.
As per allegation in the FIR, informant has purchased land for running a shop the all the FIR named accused persons including the appellants started to abuse the informant by taking his cast name and assaulted her. When her husband came there to rescue the wife, he was also beaten up by the accused persons.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that appellants have been falsely implicated in this case due to village politics. 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. Injury received by the injured persons is simple in nature. General and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the appellants. Moreover, appellant no. 1 is son of appellant no. 2 and both are languishing in judicial custody since 10.11.2022.
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
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.460 of 2023(4) dt.06-07-2023 3/3
allegation against the appellants, the Court is inclined to allow this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 6.12.2022 passed in B.P. No 5738 of 2022 is hereby set aside.
The appellants are directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Shikarpur P.S. Case No. 912 of 2022on 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 Additional District & Sessions Judge-cumSpecial Judge (SC/ST) Bettiah, West Champaran.
(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J)
sushma/-
U
3 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to appellants charged with offences under various sections of IPC and the SC/ST Act.
Whether the allegation of victim insult under the SC/ST Act is made out against the appellants.
Whether the impugned bail rejection order should be set aside and bail granted.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Pappu Rai
Rangeela Rai
The State of Bihar
Sunil Kumar Panwar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
