Malti Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.116 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-16 Year-2020 Thana- CHANDRADIP District- Jamui ====================================================== 1.

MALTI DEVI W/o Tilakdhari Ravidas Resident of Village-Chaurasa, P.SChandradeep and District-Jamui. 2.

Soni Kumari D/o Tilakdhari Ravidas Resident of Village-Chaurasa, P.SChandradeep and District-Jamui. ... ... Appellants.

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Akash Raj For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Sadanand Paswan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 02-02-2022 Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned counsel for the informant and learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.

Learned counsel for the appellants undertakes to remove the defects within four weeks of resumption of normal court proceeding. In the eventuality of non-removal of defects within undertaken period, the office will place the matter before the Bench.

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

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.116 of 2021(3) dt.02-02-2022 2/3 vide order dated 07.07.2020 passed by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge cum Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Jamui in connection with Chandraddep P.S. Case No. 16/2020 registered under Sections 302 & 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1) (v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that the appellants have no concern with the aforesaid occurrence. They have been falsely implicated in the case due to dirty village politics. The allegation levelled against the appellants is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. There is no eye witness of the said occurrence. Appellants are ladies. Appellants have no criminal antecedent. Learned Spl. PP for the State vehemently opposing the prayer for bail submitted that the appellants were made accused in this case on the basis of the CDR location and after investigation. There is ample evidence against the appellants in the case diary. Hence, they do no deserve anticipatory bail. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the appellants on bail. The prayer for bail is hereby rejected.

However, appellants are directed to surrender before

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.116 of 2021(3) dt.02-02-2022 3/3 the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail and the learned Court below would pass order on the same day in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order.

Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U T