Mukesh Kumar And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.990 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -285 Year- 2017 Thana -JAGDIHSPUR District- BHOJPUR ===========================================================

1. Mukesh Kumar Son of Umesh Yadav

2. Vidya Yadav Son of Late Ramadhar Yadav

3. Jitendra Yadav Son of Ram Prabash Yadav

4. Surendra Yadav @ Rajiv Gandhi Yadav @ Surendra Son of Late Nageshwar Yadav

5. Kishun Yadav alias Krishna Yadav Son of Late Munshi Yadav

6. Raju Yadav alias Rajiv Gandhi Yadav Son of Late Bhawar Yadav

7. Rakatu Yadav alias Udai Shankar Yadav Son of Late Munshi Yadav

8. Bikash Yadav Son of Raktu Yadav All are residents of village - Ghagha Bazar, (Naina Garh), P.S. Jagdishpur, District Bhojpur. .... .... Appellant/s

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Shiv Prasad Gupta, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Smt. Usha Kumari No.1, SPP =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 28-06-2018 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

This is an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the refusal of prayer for anticipatory bail vide order dated 07.02.2018 passed in A.B.P. No.12 of 2018 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Ara, in connection with Jagdishpur Police Station Case No. 285 of 2017 registered under Sections 147/148/149/ 447/ 337/427/435/504/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(i)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.990 of 2018 dt.28-06-2018 P2/ Allegation against the appellants is that they abused and assaulted to the informant by taking her caste name and committed arson in the hut causing burn and death of the animals kept there. Other witnesses have also supported the allegation. The police have found the sign of burning.

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that there is case and counter case between the parties. Earlier case with identical allegation was lodged by the appellants' side. After hearing the parties and considering the entire facts of this case, in my view, this is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. Hence, this appeal against the refusal of anticipatory bail is dismissed.

(Birendra Kumar, J) Mkr./- AFR/NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date Transmission Date