Ramdev Rai And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.1797 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -13 Year- 2006 Thana -NANHPUR District- SITAMARHI ===========================================================

1. Ramdev Rai, Son of Late Jatahu Rai,

2. Shiv Shankar Rai, Son of Kishundeo Rai @ Krishandeo Rai, Both resident of Vill- Sirsi, PS.- Nanpur, Dist- Sitamarhi ..... .... Appellant/s

Versus

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

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Jha, Adv For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, SPP =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 02-07-2018 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

This is an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the refusal of prayer for bail by order dated 12.04.2018 by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, (S.C./S.T. Act), Sitamarhi, in connection with Trial No. 286 of 2017 arising out of Nanpur Police Station Case No.13 of 2006 registered under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

11 FIR named persons including the appellants intercepted the informant and his family members on the way and 3 to 4 out of them gave dagger blow to the niece of the informant, aged about 7 years and committed her death. Submission of the learned counsel for the appellants is that none claims to have identified the assailants

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1797 of 2018 dt.02-07-2018 2/2 of the deceased, though the mother of the deceased, was present at the time of occurrence. After investigation, the appellants were not sent up for trial. However, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance. The appellants are in custody since 31.03.2018.

Learned counsel for the State submits that the case diary reveals that no eye witness has supported that the appellants were assailants.

Hence, let the appellants, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court-below where the case is pending in connection with the aforesaid case, with condition that both bailors shall be resident of territorial jurisdiction of the learned court below and further the appellants shall fully cooperate with the investigation/trial of the case, failing which the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bond of the appellants.

Accordingly, the appeal stands allowed.

(Birendra Kumar, J) Nitesh/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date03.07.2018 Transmission Date 03.07.2018