Pranav Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3981 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-46 Year-2020 Thana- DHAMDAHA District- Purnia ====================================================== PRANAV KUMAR YADAV S/o- DINESH YADAV R/o Village- Mugliya Purandaha (West), P.S.- Dhamdaha, District- Purnea.... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Rina Devi Wife of Niranjan Mandal Resident of Village-Mugaliya Purandaha(west),Ward no-02,P.S-Dhamdaha,District-Purnia ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr.N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Adv.

Dr. Bidhu Ranjan, Adv.

Mr. Kumar Rajdeep, Adv.

For the O.P. No. 2 :

Mr.Amit Kumar Anand, Adv.

For the State :

Mr. Vinay Krishna, Spl.PP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 20-10-2022 The learned counsel for the appellant is directed to remove all the defects pointed out by the office within one month.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned counsel for the informant.

This appeal has been preferred on behalf of the appellant under Section 14 (A) (2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for setting aside the order dated 03.09.2021 passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST, Purnea in connection with Dhamdaha P.S. Case No. 46 of 2020 registered for offence punishable under sections 323, 341, 379, 384, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3 (i) (r) 3 (2) (va)

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3981 of 2021(3) dt.20-10-2022 2/3 of the SC/ST (POA) Act, whereby the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellant has been rejected.

As per allegation, the accused persons abused the informant by calling her caste name and they snatched gold chain from her neck.

The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the present case has been filed after two days of filing of Dhamdaha P.S. Case No. 45 of 2020 by the defense side. As a matter of fact, the members of defense side made complaint to the informant, who is Pramukh regarding non-distribution of ration by PDS dealer. The family members of the informant had assaulted the members of defense side and the above mentioned case was lodged in this regard. The learned counsel for the appellant has also submitted that the name and title mentioned in the FIR shows that the informant does not belong to the category of SC/ST.

On the other hand, the learned counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the accused persons humiliated and intimated the members of informant side, which attracts the provisions of SC/ST Act. The learned counsel for the informant has also submitted that the anticipatory bail petition is not maintainable, as the appellant is

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3981 of 2021(3) dt.20-10-2022 3/3 on police bail and he was given the benefit of Section 41(1) (B) (ii) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, it appears that the investigating authorities did not require the custody of the appellant. The appellant is directed to surrender before the court below and in case he files his regular bail petition, that shall be disposed of on the same day without being prejudiced by this order in terms of judgment reported in 2004 (3) P.L.J.R. 491, Mahendra Prasad Singh vs. State of Bihar. The learned court below may take notice of the fact that the appellant is a person of clean antecedent and the member of defense side has filed a case against the informant and her family members, which is earlier to the present case. Office shall ensure that all defects are removed by the appellant within the stipulated time mentioned hereinabove, failing which, the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

With the above observations, this appeal is disposed of.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Nirmal/Mahesh U T