Partly allowed

Chandrakala Devi v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC18 Oct 2023CR. APP (SJ)/964/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal appeal under the SC/ST Act, the High Court altered a lower court order refusing bail. Appellant no. 3 was granted bail on surrender, while prayers for anticipatory bail by appellants nos. 1 and 2 were rejected due to specific caste-based allegations, though they retain the right to seek regular bail upon surrender.

What did the court decide?

Bail enlarged for appellant no. 3 upon arrest or surrender; prayer for anticipatory bail rejected for appellants nos. 1 and 2.

Chandrakala Devi Vs The State of Bihar — Caste Atrocities | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.964 of 2023

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-35 Year-2018 Thana- SC/ST District- Madhubani

¶3

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

¶4

Chandrakala Devi Wife Of Baijnath Kamat R/V- Deep, P.S.- Lakhnaur, District- Madhubani

¶5

Dayawati Devi Wife Of Late Sushdha Kamat R/V- Deep, P.S.- Lakhnaur, District- Madhubani

¶6

Ramakant Kamat @ Ramakant Yadav Son Of Awadh Kamat R/V- Deep, P.S.- Lakhnaur, District- Madhubani

¶7

... ... Appellant/s

¶8

Versus

¶9

The State of Bihar

¶10

Upendra Narayan Das Son Of Late Awadh Narayan Das R/V- Deep, P.S.Lakhnaur (r.s.o.p.), District- Madhubani

¶11

... ... Respondent/s

¶12

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

¶13

Appearance :

¶14

For the Appellant/s : Mr.Jitendra Kumar Bharti For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sadanand Paswan

¶15

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

¶16

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER

¶17

5 18-10-2023

¶18

Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶19

Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State has informed that in compliance of the order dated 23.05.2023, he has informed the informant/complainant but none is present on his/her behalf.

¶20

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

¶21

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.964 of 2023(5) dt.18-10-2023 2/4

¶22

03.11.2022, passed by learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judgecum-Special Judge, Madhubani in connection with SC/ST P.S. Case No. 35 of 2018, registered under Sections 341, 323, 384, 379, 504, 506/34 of the IPC and Sections 3(i) (r) (s) and 3 (2) (va) of SC/ST Act.

¶23

Appellants are said to have abused the informant and also assaulted him.

¶24

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that the appellants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the occurrence took place on 16.07.2018 but Complaint has been filed on 26.07.2018 after delay of 10 days which creates serious doubt about the prosecution case. He submits that there is no specific overt act against the appellants to abuse the informant by taking caste name. He submits that there is general and omnibus allegation levelled against the appellants. He further submits that appellants have no criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of this appeal.

¶25

However, learned Spl. PP for the State opposing the prayer for bail submits that there is specific allegation against appellant nos. 1 and 2 who abused the informant by taking caste name.

¶26

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.964 of 2023(5) dt.18-10-2023 3/4

¶27

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that there is no specific overt act against the appellant no. 3, let the above named appellant no. 3 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 1^st Additional Sessions Judge-cumSpecial Judge, Madhubani in connection with SC/ST P.S. Case No. 35 of 2018, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶28

So far as appellant nos. 1 and 2 is concerned, there is specific overt act against them, I am not inclined to enlarge the appellant nos. 1 and 2 on bail. Accordingly, their prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected in connection with the aforesaid case.

¶29

However, if the appellant nos. 1 and 2 surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today and pray for regular bail, the same shall be considered by the learned court below on the same day without being prejudiced by this order considering the fact that the appellant nos. 1 and 2 are female.

¶30

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.964 of 2023(5) dt.18-10-2023 4/4

¶31

Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside

¶32

and the appeal is partly allowed.

¶33

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J)

¶34

devendra/-

¶35

U T

Chandrakala Devi v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandrakala Devi 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

Mahboob Alam Khan @ Baristar Khan @ Mahboob Khan Vs The State of Bihar

Neha Devi Vs the State of Bihar

Shaligram Yadav @ Shailendra Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Ashok Anshu Vs The State of Bihar

Munna Singh @ Dev Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Shravan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar