Rakesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1720 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-78 Year-2024 Thana- SC/ST District- Purnia ====================================================== Rakesh Kumar S/o Basisth Narayan Singh Resident of Mohalla - Amla tola, Dharamasala Road, Police Station-K. Hat, O.P- Madhubani, District- Purnea ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Anita Kumari W/o Shyam Lal Tuddu R/o vill - Bisanpur, P.S. - K. Nagar, Distt.- Purnea. At present Bhaggan Hembram, Mohalla - Tuddu Nagar Mirja Hata, ward no. 4, P.s.- K. Hat T.O.P., Madhubani, Distt.- Purnea ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr.Rakesh Kumar Jha, Adv Mr. Navin Kumar, Adv For the Respondent/s :

Ms.Usha Kumari 1, Spl. PP Mr. Bijemndra Kumar Singh, Adv Mr. Aniket Singh, Adv ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 03-12-2025 1.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant; learned Spl. P.P. for the State, Ms. Usha Kumari No. 1, and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant. 2.

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 8-4-2025 in A.B.P. No. 22 of 2025 passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Purnea in connection with SC/ST P.S. Case No. 78 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable

2/4 under Sections 223, 341, 379, 354B, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of the Indian Penal Code as well as Sections 3(r)(s)(u)(w)(i)(ii) of the SC/ST Act.

3.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that she is a teacher and intended to purchase land, the appellant showed a document relating to his land, thereafter an agreement for sale dated 2-8-2018 was prepared on which Suman signed as a witness and an amount of Rs. 50,000 by way of advance was paid, further an amount of Rs. 4,50,000/-, Rs. 38,000 and Rs. 2,76,000 was paid to the appellant on 16-8-2018, 12-12-2021 and 18-4-2023 and the receiving was taken on the agreement for sale in presence of the witnesses, further an amount of Rs. 1,00,000 for registration was also given, as such an amount of Rs.

8,14,000 in total was paid to the appellant, but then registration was not done, on inquiry it transpired that the land belongs to Chedi Paswan, accordingly on 8-6-2023 the informant along with her husband went to the house of the appellant when they were abused by taking caste name and assaulted and snatched her chain worth Rs.

3/4 when the occurrence is alleged to have taken place. 4.

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that appellant has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that taking the line of least resistance, it is submitted that appellant has already paid an amount of Rs. 7,85,000 in the account of the informant. It is further submitted that rest Rs. 29,000 shall also be paid to the appellant within a period of 6 weeks. 5.

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant also does not dispute the said submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant that an amount of Rs. 7,85,000 has already been credited in the account of the informant. It is next submitted that since appellant is ready to pay the rest of the amount, as such the appeal is not being opposed.

6.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the rest amount of Rs. 29,000 shall be paid on or before the date on which the appellant surrenders before the learned trial court.

7.

Considering the aforesaid facts, let the appellant above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial trial court within a period of six weeks from today,

4/4 be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with the aforesaid case, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.

8.

Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal stands allowed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T