Allowed

Pintu Kumar @ Pintu Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC22 Nov 2023CR. APP (SJ)/729/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court heard an appeal against the refusal of anticipatory bail in a caste-atrocities case. Finding no evidence of specific overt acts or public view occurrence against the appellants, the High Court allowed the appeal and granted bail.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order is set aside and the appellants are released on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties within six weeks.

Pintu Kumar @ Pintu Yadav Vs The State of Bihar — Caste Atrocities | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.729 of 2023

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-231 Year-2022 Thana- KUTUMBA District- Aurangabad

¶3

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

¶4

PINTU KUMAR @ PINTU YADAV Son of Suryadeo Yadav Resident of Village- Loharchak, P.O and P.S.- Kutumba, District- Aurangabad

¶5

ANUJ YADAV Son of Ajay Yadav Resident of Village- Loharchak, P.O and P.S.- Kutumba, District- Aurangabad

¶6

ARJUN KUMAR @ ARJUN YADAV Son of Ram Swarup Yadav Resident of Village- Loharchak, P.O and P.S.- Kutumba, District- Aurangabad

¶7

MANTU KUMAR @ MANTU YADAV Son of Kapil Yadav Resident of Village- Loharchak, P.O and P.S.- Kutumba, District- Aurangabad

¶8

... ... Appellant/s

¶9

Versus

¶10

The State of Bihar

¶11

Mantu Ram Son of Dev Keshwar Ram Resident of Mahuwa Dham, Mirjapur, P.S.- Kutumba, District- Aurangabad

¶12

... ... Respondent/s

¶13

====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mrs.Rupa Kumari, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sadanand Paswan, Spl.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER

¶14

3 22-11-2023 Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned Spl.P.P. for the State.

¶15

In compliance of the order of this Court, learned Spl.P.P. for the State informed the respondent no.2 about his appearance in the appeal but nobody appears on his behalf.

¶16

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 anticipatory bail vide order dated

¶17

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.729 of 2023(3) dt.22-11-2023 2/3

¶18

17.12.2022, passed by learned 1^st Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST, Aurangabad, in connection with Kutumba P.S. Case No.231 of 2022, registered u/s 341, 323, 504, 379/34 of the IPC and sections 3(1)(r)(s)/3(2) (va) of the SC/ST Act.

¶19

As per the F.I.R., the named accused persons including the appellants abused the informant by taking his caste name and asked him to remove stair from road, which the informant was using in fitting electric wire. Thereafter, they attacked upon him with lathi-danda.

¶20

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that the appellants are innocent and have not committed any offence. No such occurrence, in the manner as alleged has ever taken place. Appellants have been falsely implicated in the case with frivolous allegation. It is submitted that no offence under the SC/ST Act is made out against the appellants as there is no evidence that the said occurrence has taken place in the public view. There is no specific overt act against the appellants to abuse the informant by taking caste name. Appellant nos.1 and 4 have no criminal antecedent and appellant nos.2 and 3 have one criminal antecedent.

¶21

Learned Spl. PP for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

¶22

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.729 of 2023(3) dt.22-11-2023 3/3

¶23

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, since there is no specific overt act against the appellants, let the appellants named above, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned 1^st Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST, Aurangabad, in connection with Kutumba P.S. Case No.231 of 2022, subject to the condition as laid down under section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶24

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

¶25

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J)

¶26

pallavi/-

¶27

U T

Pintu Kumar @ Pintu Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pintu Kumar @ Pintu Yadav 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

Chhotu Kumar @ Amrendra Giri Vs the State of Bihar

Chanda Khatoon Vs The State of Bihar

Anmol Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Gopal Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Mansoor Ansari @ Rehan Ans Ans Vs The State of Bihar

Vicky Sahni @ Vicky Kumar Vs The State of Bihar