Rohit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1916 of 2023

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-164 Year-2022 Thana- MEHANDIGANJ District- Patna

¶3

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

¶4

Rohit Kumar, aged about 24 years, Gender-Male, S/o Binod Mahto @ Binod Mehata @ Binod Mahato, R/o-Maheshpur, P.S.-Mehandiganj, District-Patna.

¶5

Kundan Kumar @ Raj, aged about 20 years, Gender-Male, S/o Binod Mahto @ Binod Mehata, R/o-Maheshpur, P.S.-Mehandiganj, District-Patna.

¶6

Vikash Kumar, aged about 23 years, Gender-Male, S/o Binay Mahto, R/oMaheshpur, P.S.-Mehandiganj, District-Patna.

¶7

Sanjay Kumar, aged about 23 years, Gender-Male, S/o Naresh Kevat, R/oMaheshpur, P.S.-Mehandiganj, District-Patna.

¶8

Raju Kumar, aged about 20 years, Gender-Male, S/o Dilip Singh, R/oMaheshpur, P.S.-Mehandiganj, District-Patna.

¶9

Mohit Kumar, aged about 22 years, Gender-Male, S/o Manoj Prasad, R/oMaheshpur, P.S.-Mehandiganj, District-Patna.

¶10

Ravi Kumar, aged about 22 years, Gender-Male, S/o Cholla Pandit, R/oMaheshpur, P.S.-Mehandiganj, District-Patna.

¶11

Sankar Kumar @ Shankar Kumar, aged about 23 years, Gender-Male, S/o Late Munee Pandit, R/o-Maheshpur, P.S.-Mehandiganj, District-Patna.

¶12

... ... Appellants

¶13

Versus

¶14

The State of Bihar.

¶15

Manoj Kumar Paswan, S/o Late Jamun Paswan, R/o Mehandiganj Paani Tanki Devi Sthan, P.S.-Mehandiganj, District-Patna.

¶16

... ... Respondents

¶17

====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellants : Mr. Abhimanyu Deo, Advocate For the Respondent No.2: None. For the State : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, Spl. P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

¶18

ORAL ORDER

¶19

6 05-01-2024 Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned

¶20

Spl. P.P. for the State. However, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 is not present after issuance of notice.

¶21

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

¶22

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1916 of 2023(6) dt.05-01-2024 2/4

¶23

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter in short referred to as the ‘SC/ST Act’) against the refusal of prayer of anticipatory bail of the appellants vide order dated 16.03.2023, passed by the learned Exclusive Special Court, SC/ST Act, Patna in A.B.P. No. 362 of 2023 in connection with Mehandiganj P.S. Case No. 164 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 341, 307, 354, 379, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 27 of the Arms Act and Sections 3(1)(r)(s) (w) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act.

¶24

The prosecution case, in brief, is that the appellants and other accused persons are alleged to have attacked the informant and his people of Mohalla with brick, stone, lathi, danda, sword, farsa and injured them badly while the informant was returning after idol immersion. When the informant’s family members came to save him, they were also assaulted and misbehaved by the accused persons and the accused persons also snatched golden Mangalsutra and ear-ring from them. It is also alleged that the appellants and other accused persons fired on the informant but anyhow, he saved.

¶25

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that the appellants are quite innocent and have falsely been

¶26

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1916 of 2023(6) dt.05-01-2024 3/4

¶27

implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. There is general and omnibus allegation against the appellants. It is submitted that the appellant no. 1 had earlier lodged Mehandiganj P.S. Case No. 163 of 2022 on 03.11.2022 against Golu Kumar who is one of the family members of the informant. There is no castiest remark alleged against the appellants. No member of public was present at the relevant point of time of the alleged incident. Hence, no offence under SC/ST Act is made out against the appellants. The appellant no. 1 has one criminal antecedent in which he is on bail and appellant nos. 2 to 8 have no criminal antecedent as stated in paragraph no. 3 of the memo of appeal.

¶28

Learned Spl. P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants.

¶29

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order dated 16.03.2023, passed by learned Exclusive Special Court, SC/ST Act, Patna in A.B.P. No. 362 of 2023 in connection with Mehandiganj P.S. Case No. 164 of 2022, is set aside against the appellants. The criminal appeal is allowed.

¶30

Accordingly, the above named appellants, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned court below

¶31

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1916 of 2023(6) dt.05-01-2024 4/4

¶32

within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/(Rupees Twenty Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Court, SC/ST Act, Patna in connection with Mehandiganj P.S. Case No. 164 of 2022, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶33

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

¶34

U.K./- U T

Rohit Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chandan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Ali Hassan Vs The State of Bihar

Prabhu Bin Vs The State of Bihar

Vinod Prasad Singh @ Vinod Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Manoj Kumar Pandey @ Manoj Pandey @ Mintu Pandey Vs The State of Bihar

Vijay Yadav @ Vijay Kumar Vs The State of Bihar