Manoj Kumar Gupta @ Manoj Saw v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2999 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2023 Thana- SC/ST District- Patna ====================================================== 1.
MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA @ MANOJ SAW son of Late Chhadhari Saw Resident of Village - Singhara PS - Maner Dist. - Patna 2.
Rahul Kumar son of Dindayal Prasad @ Dindayal Saw @ Dindayal Sah Resident of Village - Singhara PS - Maner Dist - Patna 3.
Dindayal Saw @ Dindayal Sah @ Dindayal Prasad son of Late Chhadhari Saw Resident of Village- Singhara PS - Maner Dist- Patna 4.
Ritik Kumar son of Dindayal Saw @ Dindayal Sah @ Dindayal Prasad Resident of Village - Singhara PS - Maner Dist- Patna ... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Chandra Vikash Kumar son of Dev Bihari Paswan Resident of VillageSinghara PS - Maner Dist - Patna ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s :
Mr. Sheo Kumar Prasad, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl. P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 01-08-2023
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for 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 12.04.2023 in A.B.P. No. 1278 of 2023 passed by the learned Exclusive Special Court S.C./S.T. Act, Patna in connection with SC/ST P.S. Case No. 01 of 2023 registered
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2999 of 2023(2) dt.01-08-2023 2/2 under Sections 447, 448, 147, 148, 341, 323, 325, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Sections 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2) (va) of the SC/ST Act.
3. Learned counsel for the informant at the outset submits that he has instruction not to oppose the appeal against the refusal of prayer for anticipatory bail.
4. Learned Special Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
5. Hence, let the appellants, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the order, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.5,000/- (rupees five 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, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
6. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and this appeal stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T