Ranjit Kumar @ Ranjeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.3016 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-10 Year-2017 Thana- SC/ST District- Jehanabad ====================================================== Ranjit Kumar @ Ranjeet Kumar, Son of Sadhu Charan Singh, Resident of Village- Chamandi, Police Station- Kurtha, District- Arwal. ... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s :
Mr. Uday Narayan Singh For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Sadanand Paswan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 06-10-2018 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 (hereinafter referred to as the "SC/ST Act") against the refusal of prayer for anticipatory bail vide order dated 02.07.2018 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-1st, Jehanabad in A.B.P. No.964 of 2018, arising out of Arwal SC/ST Police Station Case No.10 of 2017 registered under Sections 341, 323, 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 (1) (r) (s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
The appellant is a PACS dealer. The Authority had come to inspect the PACS shop of the appellant. The informant and others wanted to register their complaint to the Authority
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3016 of 2018 dt.06-10-2018 2/3 against the appellant. The appellant allegedly abused, assaulted and misbehaved with them for the reason that they belonged to the member of the scheduled castes.
Submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that during investigation it is revealed that females of the two families were candidates of the local Panchayat election and from that time animosity is there between the two and as such false case has been lodged. The appellant has got no criminal antecedent.
Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail on the ground that some other witnesses have supported the allegation.
Considering the entire facts of this case, let the appellant, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) 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, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure as well as condition that the appellant shall fully co-operate with the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3016 of 2018 dt.06-10-2018 3/3 investigation/trial of the case, failing which the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bond of the appellant. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and this appeal stands allowed.
(Birendra Kumar, J) abhishek/- AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date Transmission Date