Sunita Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3574 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2017 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE District- Sheohar ====================================================== 1.

SUNITA DEVI Wife of Gopal Prasad Gupta @ Gopal Prasad Resident of Village-Nayagaon, P.S.-Sheyampur Bhatahan, District-Sheohar. 2.

Gopal Prasad Gupta @ Gopal Prasad Son of Late Shivadhari Sah Resident of Village-Nayagaon, P.S.-Sheyampur Bhatahan, District-Sheohar. 3.

Baidyanath Rai Son of Ramji Rai Resident of Ward no.13, P.S. and DistrictSheohar. 4.

Dharmendra Rai Son of Baidyanath Rai Resident of Ward no.13, P.S. and District-Sheohar.

... ... Appellants.

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

Kamal Mehtar Son of Late Asharfi Mehtar Resident of Ward no.14, P.S. and District-Sheohar.

... ... Respondents.

====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Md. Anisur Rahman For the Respondent/s :

Mrs. Usha Kumari 1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA JAISWAL ORAL ORDER 15-10- Heard learned counsel for the appellants 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 of anticipatory bail vide order dated 26.06.2019 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge cum Special Judge, Sheohar in connection with Complaint Case No.01 of 2017 (Trial No.113 of 2018) registered under Sections 323 &

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3574 of 2019(3) dt.15-10-2019 2/3 341 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1) (x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

Appellants dismantled the house of the informant taking the police under their influence and dumped the garbage on the land of the informant and also initiated a proceeding under Section 144 Cr.P.C. regarding the property in question taking the administration in their collusion. However, on vacating the rule by the SDO, all the appellants arriving at the land of the informant along with the local police personnel slated him in the name of caste and slapped him.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that the appellants have no concern with the aforesaid occurrence. As a matter of fact, appellant Sunita Devi has purchased the land in question from the pattidar of the informant in the year 2016 and got her name mutated on the said land and obtained possession thereof but the informant created disturbance in peaceful possession of the land for which the appellants initiated a proceeding under Section 144 Cr.P.C. and due to aforesaid land dispute and to mount pressure upon the appellants informant has lodged this false and frivolous case against them. There is inordinate delay of ten days in filing the complaint petition

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3574 of 2019(3) dt.15-10-2019 3/3 without assigning any plausible explanation for the said delay. Appellants have no criminal antecedent.

Learned Spl. PP for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, the above named appellants, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge cum Special Judge, Sheohar in connection with Complaint Case No.01 of 2017, 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.

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