Sunita Devi Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2024)

Sunita Devi Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Impugned refusal order set aside; the three appellants, on arrest or surrender before the learned court below within six weeks of receipt of the order, to be released on anticipatory bail on a bail bond of Rs.5,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to the conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC.

Issue for consideration

Whether the appellants, whose prayer for anticipatory bail was refused in A.B.P. No. 2101 of 2020, should be released on anticipatory bail in connection with Kharik P.S. Case No.95/2020.

Court's answer

The order impugned (refusal of anticipatory bail) is set aside; the appellants are to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the order.

Ratio / Principle

Release on anticipatory bail is conditioned on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Key takeaways

The appeal stands allowed.ratio¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court, CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1555 of 2021 (oral order dated 20-06-2024, Satyavrat Verma, J): Appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against refusal of anticipatory bail vide order dated 07.01.2021 in A.B.P. No. 2101 of 2020 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-III-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Bhagalpur, arising from Kharik P.S. Case No.95/2020 registered under Sections 341, 323, 452, 354(B), 34 IPC and Sections 3(1)(r)(s) SC/ST Act. Counsel submitted that the appellants are women of clean antecedents falsely implicated, that allegations against them are general and omnibus, that the male accused were already released on bail, and that the parties had since compromised (Annexure-3 to the memo of appeal); the Special P.P. opposed the prayer. Considering these submissions, the Court set aside the impugned order and directed that the appellants, on arrest or surrender within six weeks, be released on anticipatory bail on a bail bond of Rs.5,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to Section 438(2) CrPC conditions. Appeal allowed.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1555 of 2021

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-95 Year-2020 Thana- KHARIK District- Bhagalpur

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

SUNITA DEVI Wife of Parshuram Kumar @ Parshuram Singh Resident of Village- Dhrubganj, P.S.- Kharik, District- Bhagalpur.

Anjani Devi Wife of Ramjot Roy @ Ramjot Kumar Resident of VillageDhrubganj, P.S.- Kharik, District- Bhagalpur.

Priyanka Kumari Daughter of Ramjot Roy @ Ramjot Kumar Resident of Village- Dhrubganj, P.S.- Kharik, District- Bhagalpur.

... ... Appellant/s

Versus

The State of Bihar Bihar

Payal Kumari Vakil Sharma R/V-Dhrubganj, P.S.-Kharik, Distt.-Bhagalpur

... ... Respondent/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Bijendra Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

4 20-06-2024

Heard learned counsel for the appellants and the

learned Special P.P. Mr. Binay Krishna.

This is an appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the “SC/ST Act”) against the refusal of prayer for anticipatory bail vide order dated 07.01.2021 in A.B.P. No. 2101 of 2020 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Bhagalpur in connection with Kharik P.S. Case No.95/2020, registered under Sections 341, 323, 452, 354(B), 34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Sections 3(1)(r)(s) of the

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1555 of 2021(4) dt.20-06-2024 2/3

SC/ST Act.

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants are persons with clean antecedent and are women and have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that the male accused were taken in custody and were subsequently released on bail. It is further submitted that on intervention of well wishers the parties compromised the case as would be evident from Annexure-3 to the memo of appeal. It is also submitted that the allegations against the appellants are general and omnibus in nature.

Learned Special Public Prosecutor Mr. Binay Krishna opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants.

Considering the submission of the learned counsel for the appellants, the order impugned is set aside. Let the appellants, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the order, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending in connection with the aforesaid case, subject to the conditions as laid down

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1555 of 2021(4) dt.20-06-2024 3/3

under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and

this appeal stands allowed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

amit/-

U T