Chaturi Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1310 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-4 Year-2024 Thana- MOTIHARI TOWN District- East Champaran ====================================================== Chaturi Rai S/O Late Lal Bahadur Rai R/O Village- Mauje Parsa, P.SPakaridayal, Distt.- East Champaran ... ... Appellant/S

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

Jhari Paswan S/O Late Jagdish Paswan R/O Village- Mauje Parsa, P.SPakaridayal, Distt.- East Champaran. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Sadanand Paswan, Spl. PP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 22-09-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Special P.P. for the State Mr. Sadanand Paswan and learned counsel for the informant.

2. The appellant apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under 341, 323, 354(B), 120(B), 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(i)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the appellant is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that he along with his wife and daughterin-law had come to the labour court as their case was pending,

2/4 where all the FIR named accused persons including the appellant was present and the appellant assaulted the informant and his family members and abused them by their caste name. Further, the appellant and the bench clerk of the labour court intended to take signature of the informant on his deposition which was recorded by the judge but when the lawyer of the informant read the deposition, then informant realised that what he had deposed was not recorded, but still the bench clerk in connivance with the appellant intended to take his signature so that the workman compensation case filed by the informant against the appellant is dismissed.

4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that the informant was working in the house of the appellant but accidentally his hand got cut on which the appellant assured that he will get him treated and will also help him in the marriage of his daughter, but when the same was not done as a consequence whereof a workman compensation case was filed by the informant, where he had gone to depose when the occurrence as alleged in the FIR is alleged to have taken place. It is submitted that no doubt the informant was working in the

3/4 house of the appellant, but then it is not the case of the informant that appellant in any manner was responsible for the accident which occurred. It is submitted that the appellant out of humanity had assured of help, but when there was delay in extending the help, the workman compensation case came to be instituted and thereafter the instant FIR was instituted. It is submitted that the bench clerk of the learned Judge, Labour Court had approached this court seeking quashing of the order of cognizance by filing Cr. W.J.C No. 348 of 2024 (Vikas Kumar v. State of Bihar) and the same was allowed by learned coordinate Bench by an order dated 15.03.2024. It is next submitted that in the nature of allegation as alleged in the FIR, no offence under the SCST Act is made out.

5. The learned Special PP and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant oppose the appeal.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant, the appellant above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where

4/4 the case is pending/successor court in connection with Motihari Town P.S. Case No. 4 of 2024 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of BNSS.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Prakash/- U