Dularu Sao @ Rahul Kumar @ Dularu v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4081 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-40 Year-2024 Thana- BUNIYAD GANJ District- Gaya ====================================================== Dularu Sao @ Rahul Kumar @ Dularu Son of Late Manoj Sao RO VillageJoda Masjid, P.S.- Buniyadganj, District- Gaya ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar Bihar 2.

Tiger Kumar Son of Late Rajaram Ravidas R/O Hemanpur, Bhimnagar, P.S.- Buniyadganj, Dist.- Gaya.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr.Sudhir Kumar Sinha For the Resp No. 2 :

Mr. Priyadarshi Pankaj Raj For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Usha Kumari 1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 17-04-2025 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 as well as learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. This is an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the rejection of prayer for bail vide order dated 29.07.2024 passed by the learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Gaya in B.P. No. 2212 of 2024 arising out of Buniyadganj P.S. Case No. 40 of 2024 dated 25.02.2024 registered for the offence/s punishable u/ss 307, 302 of the IPC and sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) 3(2)(v)of the SC/ST (POA) Act and section 27 of the Arms Act.

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4081 of 2024(4) dt.17-04-2025 2/3

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant went to attend the call of nature, in the meantime, he heard the sound of gun shot, thereafter the informant went towards the Falgu river where he saw his brother lying in the middle of the river and two accused persons, namely, Dularu Sao (appellant) and Pintu Kumar was standing near the deceased and on seeing the informant, they fled away from there.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant has falsely been implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. Learned counsel has further submitted that the caste name was not disclosed by anyone at the time of the alleged occurrence. As per FIR, no member of public was present at the relevant point of time of the alleged incident hence no case is made out under SC/ST Act. There is only suspicion. The informant is not the eyewitness to the alleged incident. There is no specific allegation of firing on the deceased. Similarly situated co-accused has already been granted bail by the co-ordinate bench of Court vide order dated 19.03.2025 passed in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 53 of 2025. The appellant has two criminal antecedents as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The appellant is in custody since 26.02.2024.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 as well as

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4081 of 2024(4) dt.17-04-2025 3/3 learned Spl. P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the appellant by submitting that as per para 29 of the case diary, the appellant himself confessed that he fired on the head of the deceased. It is further stated that the case of the appellant is different to that of the co-accused who has already been granted bail by the co-ordinate bench of this court vide order dated 19.03.2025 passed in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 53 of 2025.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the specific and heinous nature of the allegation against the appellant, I am not inclined to set aside the impugned order dated 29.07.2024 passed by the learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Gaya in B.P. No. 2212 of 2024 arising out of Buniyadganj P.S. Case No. 40 of 2024 and accordingly, the prayer for bail of the appellant is rejected.

7. Learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) guddukr/- U T