Neeraj Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.363 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-287 Year-2020 Thana- TARAIYA District- Saran ====================================================== 1.

Neeraj Kumar Singh Son of Mithilesh Singh 2.

Ritesh Singh Son of Suresh Singh 3.

Indrajeet Singh Son of Ravindra Singh 4.

Bacha Singh Son of Darbesh Singh 5.

Munna Singh Son of Bigan Singh All are resident of Village- Bhataura, P.S.- Taraiya, District- Saran (Chapra). ... ... Appellants

Versus

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

For the Appellants :

Mr. Umesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent :

Ms Usha Kumari, Special PP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 26-05-2021 Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State via video conferencing.

2.

The instant appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and the Schedules Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short 'the Act') has been preferred by the appellants challenging the order dated 15.09.2020 passed in A.B.P. No.1722 of 2020 by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge 1st-cum-Special Judge, Saran (Chapra) whereby he has rejected their application for grant of pre-arrest bail in

2/5 connection with Taraiya P.S. Case No.287 of 2020 registered inter alia under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(r)(v) of the Act.

3.

The first information report was registered on the basis of fardbeyan of one Prabhu Ram, son of late Ramnarayan Ram, resident of village-Bhataura, Police StationTareya, District- Saran (Chapra). He has stated in his fardbeyan that on 10.08.2020, at about 12.30 pm, the appellants along with 6-7 unknown persons suddenly came at his door and started abusing him by taking his caste name as chamar-dushadh. They also assaulted him by iron rod and danda as a result of which he sustained dislocation of tooth. He has further alleged that when Manoj Kumar Ram came in rescue, he was assaulted by the appellant Neeraj Kumar Singh with sword as a result of which he sustained injuries over his head. He also assaulted a female inmate, namely, Ramawati Devi. He and others were taken to PHC Marhowrah for treatment from where he himself and Manoj Kumar Ram were referred to Sadar Hospital Chapra for better treatment.

4. It was at Sadar Hospital Chapra where the fardbeyan of the informant was recorded by Deo Kumar Sah, an Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police of Bhagwan Bazar Police

3/5 Station on 10.08.2020 at 7.30 pm.

5.

Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that the appellants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. He contended that names of the appellants have been given in the FIR on account of previous dispute and enmity between the parties. He further contended that from the FIR it would be apparent that the occurrence did not happen in public view. Hence, the offences under the Act are not made out. He also contended that the father of the petitioner no. 2, namely, Suresh Singh has filed a counter case against the informant and her family members vide Tarraiya P.S. Case No.286 dated 11.08.2020 registered inter alia under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code.

6.

On the other hand, learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the State submitted that the allegations made in the FIR do constitute an offence punishable under the Act. She also contended that from perusal of the FIR itself it would transpire that the incident was seen by many persons. 7.

Having heard the parties and perused the materials on record, since the ingredients of the offences punishable under Section 3(1)(r) and (v) of the Act are clearly attracted, in my view, the court below has rightly rejected the

4/5 application filed by the appellants for grant of pre-arrest bail as Section 18 of the Act clearly stipulates that nothing in Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure shall apply in relation to any case involving the arrest of any person on an accusation of having committed an offence under the Act.

8.

In that view of the matter, I see no merit in this appeal.

9.

It is dismissed, accordingly.

10.

Since the court proceedings are being conducted through virtual mode and normal court functioning has not been restored till date, it is considered appropriate to adopt the following procedure for communication of the present judgment:- (i) The order, which has been dictated during the course of proceeding of the virtual court, shall be communicated to me electronically by the Joint Registrar-cum-Addl. PPS.

(ii) The corrected copy of the order shall be transmitted by me to the Joint Registrar-cum-Addl. PPS electronically, which shall be treated to be an authentic copy of the order passed by this Court in the present proceeding.

5/5 (iii) Hard copy of the order duly signed by me shall be preserved in my residential office for documentation and future use, if any.

(iv) Let steps be taken by the Joint Registrar-cum-Addl. PPS/registry for up-loading of the present order without compromising with the norms of social distancing.

kanchan/- (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) AFR/NAFR NA CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 30.05.2021 Transmission Date 30.05.2021