Brajesh Patel v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2851 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-118 Year-2019 Thana- MUFFASIL District- West Champaran ======================================================

1. Manoj Patel, 32 years, M, Son of Sri Girgit Patal (deleted vie order dated 25.10.2019).

2. Brajesh Patel, 30 years, M, Son of Sri Girgit Patel Resident of VillageHajma Tola, Banuchhapar, P.S.- Bettiah Muffasil (Banuchhapar O.P.), District- West Champaran.

... ... Appellant/s

Versus

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

For the Appellant/s :

Ms. Rashmi Jha, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 16-11-2019 Heard learned counsel for the appellant no. 2.

2. Prayer on behalf of appellant no. 1, stood withdrawn earlier as he has been arrested.

3. The appellant no. 2 has moved the Court seeking prearrest bail in connection with Bettiah Muffasil (Banuchhapar O.P.) PS Case No. 118 of 2019 dated 02.03.2019 instituted under Sections 341, 323, 308, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(r)(w)(ii)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').

4. The appellants are accused of having assaulted the informant and two other persons. The specific allegation against the appellant no. 2 is of assault on two persons causing injury to them.

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2851 of 2019 dt.16-11-2019 2/2

5. Learned counsel for the appellant no. 2 submitted that offence under the Act is not made out and, thus, the bar of Section 18 of the Act would not operate against him for consideration of his prayer for pre-arrest bail. It was further submitted that the allegation with regard to assault on the informant is general and omnibus and even with regard to assault on two other persons, specifically attributable to the appellant no. 2, the same has not been corroborated by the independent witnesses.

6. Learned APP, from the case diary submitted that several witnesses have supported the allegations made in the FIR, especially the assault by the appellant no. 2 causing injury.

7. Having regard to the aforesaid, the Court is not inclined to allow the prayer for pre-arrest bail to the appellant no. 2.

8. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.

9. The interim protection granted earlier under order dated 28.08.2019, stands withdrawn.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) P. Kumar AFR/NAFR U T