Ajay Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3905 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-60 Year-2022 Thana- ANGARGHAT District- Samastipur ====================================================== AJAY THAKUR S/O BHUNESHWAR THAKUR Resident of villageMutriyaro Ward No- 14, P.S.- Angarghat, District- Samastipur. ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

SMT. SAROVARI DEVI W/O BHAROSH PASWAN Resident of villageDadhiya Aradhar, Ward No- 7, P.S.- Angarghat, District- Samastipur. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr.Pramod Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Usha Kumari 1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 14-03-2023 Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned Spl.P.P. for the State.

This appeal has been preferred on behalf of the appellant under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for setting aside the order dated 15.10.2022, passed by the learned Special Judge SC/ST (POA) Act, Samastipur in connection with Angarghat P.S. Case No. 60 of 2022, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code & 3(2) (va) of SC/ST Act, whereby the prayer for regular bail of the appellant has been rejected.

As per allegation, the husband of the informant was

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3905 of 2022(3) dt.14-03-2023 2/2 murdered by unknown persons. There was land dispute between co-accused Baiju Paswan and husband of the informant. It was the reason that the accused persons named in the FIR in conspiracy committed murder of the husband of the informant. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is not named in the FIR. He has falsely been implicated. Except his confessional statement there is nothing in the case diary against him.

The appellant has confessed his guilt and in his confessional statement he has given vivid description of the occurrence disclosing his complicity in the alleged occurrence. The investigation is still continuing.

Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, I do not think it to be a fit case for bail. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) SONALI/- U T