Ravindra Kumar Yadav @ Ravindra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3804 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-587 Year-2018 Thana- SHERGHATI District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.

RAVINDRA KUMAR YADAV @ RAVINDRA KUMAR Son of Fulkeshwar Yadav Resident of Village - Mokhtarganj, P.S.- Sherghati, dist.- Gaya.

2.

Pradeeep Yadav @ Pradeep Kumar Yadav Son of Rameshwar Yadav Resident of Village - Dobhi, P.S. - Dobhi, dist.- Gaya. ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr.Manish Kumar No.2, Adv For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Sadanand Paswan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 24-02-2020 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 against the refusal of prayer for bail by order dated 29.07.2019 in B.P.No.156 of 2019 arising out of Sherghati (Dobhi)P.S.Case No.587 of 2018 passed by the learned Exclusive Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Gaya, registered under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2)(4) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

According to FIR, two other co-accused Rakesh and Santosh Kumar took to the son of the informant from his

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3804 of 2019(4) dt.24-02-2020 2/2 house on a motorcycle. Thereafter, dead body of the son of the informant was recovered. Name of the appellants surfaced in the confessional statement of co-accused Santosh Kumar @ Santosh Kumar Tanti who has already been allowed bail by this Court on 06.05.2019 in Cr. Misc. No.11264 of 2019.

Considering the facts aforesaid, let the appellants, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Courtbelow where the case is pending in connection with the aforesaid case, with condition that both bailors shall be resident of territorial jurisdiction of the learned court below and further the appellants shall fully cooperate with the trial of the case and also the appellants shall not leave the country without permission of the learned Trial Court, failing which the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bond of the appellants.

Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and this appeal stands allowed.

(Birendra Kumar, J) Nitesh/- U T