Jaiveer Yadav @ Jayavir Yadav @ Jayvir Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.855 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-167 Year-2023 Thana- SINDHIYA District- Samastipur ====================================================== Jaiveer Yadav @ Jayavir Yadav @ Jayvir Yadav Son of Late Khushi Lal Yadav Resident of Village- Bhushna, P.S.- Singhia, District- Samastipur, Bihar ... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar Patna 2.
Om Prakash Paswan Son of Ram Swarath Paswan Resident of VillageDasharath Dih, P.S.- Singhia, District- Samastipur, Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s :
Mr.Rajni Kant Singh For the State :
Mr.Binay Krishna For the Respondent no.2 :
Mr. Raj Ram Mishra Mr. Raj Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 22-11-2024 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for the respondent no. 2.
2. This is an appeal under Section 14 A (2) of the 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 vide order dated 13.12.2023 passed by learned Special Judge SC/ST (POA) Act, Samastipur, in connection with Singhia P.S. Case No. 167 of 2023 registered under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307, 325, 504, 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.855 of 2024(4) dt.22-11-2024 2/3 3(1)(s), 3(1)(r), 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the appellant along with other co-accused persons is said to have abused and assaulted the informant and one Raja Paswan.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. There is no allegation of slating the informant in the specific name of his caste. Hence, no offence under SC/ST Act is made out against the appellant. He submits that there is case and counter case between the parties and injury is found simple in nature. Appellant has got six antecedents out of which three cases were lodged by the present informant due to previous enmity as mentioned in para-3 of memo of the appeal.
5. Learned Spl. PP for the State as well as learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that there is case and counter case between the parties, let the above named appellant, 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
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.855 of 2024(4) dt.22-11-2024 3/3 sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge SC/ST (POA) Act, Samastipur, in connection with Singhia P.S. Case No. 167 of 2023, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and this appeal is allowed.
(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) anand/- U T