Praveen Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4551 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-202 Year-2020 Thana- PARIHAR District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Praveen Kumar Son Of Ganga Prasad Yadav @ Ganga Rai @ Ganga Prasad Resident Of Village - Khoprahiya, P.S. - Parihar, District - Sitamarhi -843324. ... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Minki Kumari Ram Lakhan Ram R/V-Khoprahiya, P.S.-Parihar, DistrictSitamarhi, Pin-843324 ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s :
Mr.Subodh Kumar For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Usha Kumari Mr Alok Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 14-12-2022 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, respondent no. 2 and learned Spl. P.P. for the State.
Learned counsel for the appellant undertakes to remove the defects, if any, as pointed out by the office within three weeks.
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 anticipatory bail vide order dated 05.10.2021, passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-1st -cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Sitamarhi in connection with Parihar P.S. Case No. 202 of 2020 for the offences registered under Sections 341, 323, 379, 504/34
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4551 of 2021(3) dt.14-12-2022 2/3 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(r) (s) S.C./S.T. Act. Appellant is said to have abused the informant and also assaulted her.
Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. No such occurrence as alleged has ever taken place. There is an admitted land dispute between the parties. This fact has not been denied by the learned counsel for the respondent no. 2. He submits that there is no specific overt act against the appellant. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court passed in the case of Hitesh Verma Vs. State of Uttarakhand & Another reported in 2020 (10) SCC 710, if there is land dispute between the parties, the appeal for anticipatory bail is maintainable. The appellant has no criminal antecedent. Learned Spl.PP for the State and learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 oppose the prayer for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the appellant named above, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4551 of 2021(3) dt.14-12-2022 3/3 the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-1st -cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Sitamarhi in connection with Parihar P.S. Case No. 202 of 2020, subject to the condition as laid down under section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and this appeal is allowed.
(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) devendra/- U T