Sunil Kumar Mahto @ Sunil Mahton v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4348 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2013 Thana- SC/ST District- Begusarai ====================================================== SUNIL KUMAR MAHTO @ SUNIL MAHTON Son of Bechan Mahto Resident of Village- Birganj, P.S- Mansoorchak, District- Begusarai. ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr.Randhir Kumar No.1 For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Usha Kumari 1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 18-12-2019 Heard both sides.

The petitioner earlier moved this Court in Cr. Misc. No.6324 of 2015 for grant of anticipatory bail in S.C./S.T. (Begusarai) P.S. Case No.33 of 2013 registered under Sections 341, 323, 379, 420, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3(i)(x) of S.C./S.T. Act.

The petitioner was noticed and directed to be present in Court under Section 41 of the Cr.P.C. and on such, the petitioner withdrew his earlier anticipatory bail petition. Later on, the investigating officer submitted chargesheet under Section 3(i)(x) of S.C./S.T. Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that one of the accused namely, Manoj Kumar Verma has been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions Judge but on the face

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4348 of 2019(3) dt.18-12-2019 2/2 of it, it appears that investigating officer after investigation submitted chargesheet under Section 3(i)(x) of S.C./S.T. Act besides other Sections of the Indian Penal Code. Section 18 of the S.C./S.T. Act bars the application of Section 438 of Cr.P.C. In this view of the fact, petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected. The criminal appeal is dismissed.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Saurabh/- U T