Lalinder Kumar @ Ravindra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4026 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-235 Year-2023 Thana- GAYA MUFASIL District- Gaya ====================================================== LALINDER KUMAR @ RAVINDRA KUMAR S/O HARIBANSH YADAV @ UMESH YADAV R/O VILLAGE- KAIYA, P.S- MUFFASIL, DISTT.- GAYA.

... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar BIHAR 2.

RAJESHWAR DAS S/O PRABHU DAS R/O VILLAGE- KAIYA, P.SMUFFASIL, DISTT.- GAYA. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr.Anil Kumar Saxena For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Binay Krishna ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 26-07-2024 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.

2.

Though Vakalatnama has been filed on behalf of respondent no.2 but when the case is called out nobody appears on his behalf.

3.

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 01.08.2023 passed by learned Exclusive Special Judge (SC/ST Spl.), Gaya in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No.235 of 2023, registered under Sections 341, 323, 307, 354, 504, 34 of the Indian Penal

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4026 of 2023(5) dt.26-07-2024 2/2 Code and Section 3(1) (r) (s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 4.

The allegation against the appellant is that he and other co-accused persons abused and assaulted the informant's side. 5.

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. There is no specific overt act against the appellant. He submits that though there is specific allegation against the appellant to assault the father of the informant in FIR but the injury report has not supported the prosecution case. Appellant has no criminal antecedent. 6.

Learned Spl. PP for the State opposed the prayer for bail. 7.

In the facts and circumstances of the case as the injury no.1, 2 and 3 of the injured is of grievous nature, I am not inclined to enlarge the appellant on bail. The prayer for bail is hereby rejected.

8.

Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) shikha/- U T