Sarita Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3159 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-174 Year-2024 Thana- GORAUL District- Vaishali ====================================================== SARITA DEVI WIFE OF SRI RAMPRAVESH SINGH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - MATHURAPUR, P.S. - GORAUL, DISTRICT - VAISHALI ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Binay Krishna, Special P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 04-09-2024 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Special P.P. for of the State.

2. This appeal has been filed against the order dated 13.06.2024 passed by learned Exclusive Special Court, SC/ST Act, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Goraul P.S. Case No. 174 of 2024, registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 342, 323, 324, 326, 332, 333, 353, 354, 224, 225, 307, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va), 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (for short "SC/ST Act"), whereby the prayer for anticipatory bail of appellant has been rejected.

3. As per prosecution case, on the alleged date and time of occurrence, while the informant, who was A.S.I. at the relevant time, arrested one accused Kanhai Kumar, in

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3159 of 2024(2) dt.04-09-2024 2/2 connection with Goraul P.S. Case No. 398/23 and proceeded towards police vehicle, in the meantime, 20 F.I.R. named accused persons including this appellant and 70-75 unknown persons, variously armed, surrounded and attacked the police party and tried to escape the co-accused Kanhai Kumar from their custody. It is further alleged that accused persons also committed Maarpeet with police personnel including lady constables and co-accused Ram Pravesh Singh bite the left ear of informant, due to which, informant fell down and sustained injury.

4. Considering the nature of accusation and the fact that accused persons caused hindrance in discharge of duties of police party, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order impugned.

5. Accordingly, the appeal, which has been filed for grant of anticipatory bail to appellant, is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay U T