Gajendra Mehta And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.2387 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -23 Year- 2015 Thana -BHIMPUR District- SUPAUL ===========================================================

1. Gajendra Mehta, Son of Late Bhubneshwar Mehta,

2. Biran Mehta, Son of Late Nunulal Mehta,

3. Sanjiv Mehta @ Sanjiv Kumar Suman,

4. Jitendra Mehta, Both Sons of Late Ghuran Mehta, All are resident of VillageKewla, Police Station, Bhimpur, District- Supaul. .... .... Appellant/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Arun, Adv For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, SPP =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 27-08-2018 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

This is an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the refusal of prayer for bail by order dated 28.05.2018 in SC/ST Case No.194 of 2017 passed by the learned A.D.J.-I, Supaul in connection with Bhimpur Police Station Case No.23 of 2015 registered under Sections 147,148,149,341,323,324,325,354,379,307,436,120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(x),3(2)(iv),3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

This Court had granted anticipatory bail to the appellants on merit. However, order granting anticipatory bail

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2387 of 2018 dt.27-08-2018 2/2 was cancelled vide Annexure-1 when it was brought to the notice of the Court that the appellants had suppressed their criminal antecedents. After cancellation of anticipatory bail, appellants are in custody since 16.05.2018.

Considering the aforesaid facts, let the appellants, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court-below where the case is pending in connection with the aforesaid case, with condition that both bailors shall be resident of territorial jurisdiction of the learned court below and further the appellants shall fully cooperate with the investigation/trial of the case, failing which the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bond of the appellants.

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

(Birendra Kumar, J) Nitesh/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date28.08.2018 Transmission Date 28.08.2018