Satish Singh @ Satish Kumar Singh @ Satish Kumar And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.1294 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -110 Year- 2016 Thana -AMBA District- AURANGABAD ======================================================

1. Satish Singh @ Satish Kumar Singh @ Satish Kumar, Son of Late Jag Narain Singh,

2. Ranjit Singh @ Ranjeet Singh, Son of Late Jagdish Singh,

3. Sunil Kumar Singh @ Sunil Singh, Son of Late Bhuvneshwar Singh, All resident of Village Loha Bigaha, Police Station- Amba, DistrictAurangabad. .... .... Appellants

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Respondent ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Special P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 03-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned Special P.P.

This appeal has been filed for setting aside the order the order dated 29.3.2017 passed in A.B.P. No. 04 of 2017 by Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Aurangabad, arising out of Amba P.S.Case No. 110 of 2016 registered for the offences under Sections 323, 353, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and 3(i)(r), 3(i)(s), 3(2)(Va) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and for grant of pre-arrest bail to the appellants. Allegation against the appellants as per FIR is that

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1294 of 2017 (2) dt.03-07-2017 2/2 they have obstructed in the measurement done by Anchal Amin and there is allegation that they have threatened to shot him. It has been submitted on behalf of the appellants that no case under the provisions of SC/ST Act is made out against the appellants as FIR itself shows that there was dispute with respect to measurement of land which is in possession of the appellants and further it has been submitted they have settled the dispute between themselves, which is evident from impugned order itself. Learned Special P.P. has opposed the prayer.

Having heard both sides and considering the facts and circumstances, let appellants surrender and make prayer for regular bail, which will be considered by the Special court below on the basis of the submission made above as well as on the basis of allegation and pass appropriate order, if possible, on the same day.

This appeal is, accordingly, disposed of.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) spal/- U