Guddu Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3366 of 2019 In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41509 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-177 Year-2018 Thana- SAUR BAZAR District- Saharsa ====================================================== Guddu Kumar Yadav Son of Jangbahadur Yadav Resident of VillageThengha, P.S.-Sour Bazar, District-Saharsa. ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Pramod Mishra For the Respondent/s :

Mrs. Usha Kumari 1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA JAISWAL ORAL ORDER 19-09-2019 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.

This is an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter in short referred to as the 'SC/ST Act') against the refusal of prayer for bail vide order dated 05.04.2019 passed by learned 3rdAdditional Sessions Judge cum Special Judge SC/ST Act, Saharsa in connection with Special SC/ST Case No. 19 of 2018, arising out of Sour Bazar P.S. Case No.177 of 2018 registered under Sections 366A, 504 & 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1) (x) (s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3366 of 2019(4) dt.19-09-2019 2/3 (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

While the informant along with his minor daughter was regressing to his house from the market, the appellant along with 4-5 unknown miscreants kidnapped the minor daughter of the informant slated her in the name of caste. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. Appellant has been falsely implicated in the case. As a matter of fact, the victim was in love with the appellant and she suo motu eloped with him. Moreover parties to the case have compromised the matter. Appellant has no criminal antecedent and has been languishing in custody since 29.03.2018. Hence, he may be enlarged on bail.

Per contra, learned Spl. PP for the State vehemently opposing the prayer for bail submitted that the appellant has kidnapped the minor daughter of the informant along with other accused persons. Victim in her statement made under Section 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. has supported the occurrence. The informant has also supported the occurrence. Hence, the appellant does not deserve bail.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the appellant on bail. The prayer for bail

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3366 of 2019(4) dt.19-09-2019 3/3 is hereby rejected.

However, the learned Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible preferably within five months after framing of the charge. Both the parties are expected to extend their co-operation in conclusion of the trial. The appellant may renew his prayer for bail if the trial is not concluded within the stipulated period.

Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed.

(Prakash Chandra Jaiswal, J) Trivedi/- U T