Allowed

Jay Prakash Kumar @ Jay Prakash Kumar Das @ Jai Prakash Das v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC11 Nov 2024CR. APP (SJ)/1972/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the appellant, setting aside the rejection order by the Special Judge SC/ST. The court relied on the fact that co-accused had been granted bail and that the appellant belonged to the SC community, attracting no protection under the Atrocities Act.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted with bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- and two sureties of like amount, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC.

Jay Prakash Kumar @ Jay Prakash Kumar Das @ Jai Prakash Das… — Caste Atrocities | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1972 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-287 Year-2021 Thana- KALYANPUR District- East Champaran

¶3

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

¶4

JAY PRAKASH KUMAR @ JAY PRAKASH KUMAR DAS @ JAI PRAKASH DAS SON OF DINESH DAS RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - HARPUR HARAJ, P.S. - KALYANPUR, DISTRICT - EAST CHAMPARAN

¶5

... ... Appellant/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

THE STATE OF BIHAR

¶8

FAIZ AHMAD FAIZ SON OF MD. MANJURAL HAQUE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - BAHLOLPUR, P.S. - DHAKA, DISTRICT - EAST CHAMPARAN

¶9

... ... Respondent/s

¶10

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

¶11

Appearance :

¶12

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Madhurendra Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan ======================================================

¶13

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶14

2 11-11-2024 1. Heard learned Counsel for the appellant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶15

2. An order, dated 05.01.2022, passed by learned Additional Session Judge III -cum- Special Judge SC/ST, East Champaran Motihari, in ABP No. 1054 of 2024, is under challenge in the present appeal preferred under Section 14-A (2) of the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, whereby the anticipatory bail application of the appellant in connection with Kalyanpur Police Station Case No. 287 of 2021 Sections 147/148/149/341/323/325/353/354/504/506/509/307/427/ 379/188/440/332/171 F of the Indian Penal Code, Section

¶16

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1972 of 2024(2) dt.11-11-2024 2/4

¶17

27 of the Arms Act, Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, Sections 131/134(b)/135/135(a) of the Representation of the People Act and Section 3 (1)(r)(s) of the Schedule Caste/Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, has been rejected.

¶18

3. The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report, is that on 03.11.2021, during process of voting for election of Mukhiya, Mukhiya candidate Priyanka Sinha started disturbing in the pooling process. Subsequently, in the afternoon, the husband of Priyanka Sinha arrived at the polling booth with 200-250 armed persons, including the appellants and other named accused persons, and attacked the polling booth. Upon objection by the police, the accused persons started assaulting them brutally. When the police again tried to stop them, the accused persons resorted to firing and also started abusing and beating the cook present at the polling booth by her caste name.

¶19

4. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has falsely been implicated in the present case due to political reasons. He next submits that the allegation against the appellant, along with others, are

¶20

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1972 of 2024(2) dt.11-11-2024 3/4

¶21

general and omnibus in nature and the main accused persons in this case, namely, Jai Prakash Asthana and Priyanka Sinha, have been granted anticipatory bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 305 of 2022 and Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 218 of 2022, respectively. He further submits that the provision for SC/ST Act is not attracted against the appellant inasmuch as the appellant is also a member of SC. The appellant is having no criminal antecedent.

¶22

5. Having regard to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the nature of allegation and the fact that co-accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, I am inclined to grant the appellant privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶23

6. This appeal is, accordingly, allowed and the order, dated 14.03.2024, passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, East Champaran, Motihari, in ABP No. 1054 of 2024, is set aside.

¶24

7. Let the appellant, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court below within four weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-

¶25

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1972 of 2024(2) dt.11-11-2024 4/4

¶26

(Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, East Champaran, Motihari, in connection with Kalyanpur Police Station Case No. 287 of 2021, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶27

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)

¶28

ashwani/-

¶29

U T

Jay Prakash Kumar @ Jay Prakash Kumar Das @ Jai Prakash Das v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jay Prakash Kumar @ Jay Prakash Kumar Das @ Jai Prakash Das 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

Pallavi Sahay Vs the State of Bihar

Pallavi Sahay Vs The State of Bihar

Sanjay Kumar Choubey @ Sanjay Choubey Vs The State of Bihar

Nipu Chaudhary @ Amit Kumar Chaudhary Vs The State of Bihar

Niranjan Kumar @ Niranjan Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Samim Vs the State of Bihar